Berlangieri v. Running Elk Corp.
New Mexico Court of Appeals
1DissentSutin, Judge
{33} I respectfully dissent.
I. Word Usage
{34} For convenience, I refer to one providing an opportunity to engage in recreational activity as an “operator”; an exculpatory contract clause by which an operator disclaims or absolves itself from liability for negligence that causes personal injury or death as a “release”; and an individual who chooses to engage in recreational activity as a “recreation seeker.”
II. Introductory Observations
{35} The majority holds that public policy imposes on operators a non-disclaimable duty of due care. This means no release is enforceable. Some risk of harm is…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- MacPherson v. . Buick Motor Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1916
- Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1960
- Tunkl v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
- Jones v. DresselSupreme Court of Colorado · 1981
- Trujillo v. City of AlbuquerqueNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1998
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.