Zigner
Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Who said they didn't? The operator (apparently) chose to not follow the ample warnings posted on the machine to read and understand the operating instructions prior to using the machine...personally I think you have a better shot against the manufacturer than the park. The manufacturer has to deal with defective engineering and foreseeable injuries due to poor engineering or poor warnings. The lack of ROP (roll over protection) is important. Additionally, you have pointed to the problems with operating a mower on a decline. That is the type of thing the manufacturer must warn against.
Furthermore, if those warnings are obliterated or obscured, then it falls to the owner of the machine to make certain that the situation is rectified.
HOWEVER - I am curious as to why an attorney would even hesitate to name the manufacturer in the suit. Heck, I'd bet they have some pretty deep pockets!
ETA: I see that Just touched upon the above issues