Can I sue?

[qkarmark]

I am a resident of Regina, SASK, CANADA. Approximately 4 mos. ago, I was injured in the eye by a paint ball. I signed a waiver (at the establishment in which the injury occured), so I will assume that the proprietors are not liable for what happened. However, I was considering that the individual who fired the paint ball could be liable. Now, the fact remains, I could certainly be at fault also since I was not forced to be there when it happened, and if I were wearing my protective mask at the time (instead of resting it on top of my head) the injury would have been avoided.

My question is, do I have a case for an unjury suit against the person who 'shot' me (or any party).

To understand the chain of events leading up to this injury, this should explain it: I was part of a 'team' defending a small battle post ("castle") against another 'team' during a paint ball game. We were all aware that the battle post was part of the shooting/battle zone, in which firearms are 'live' and you are required to wear your mask at all times. (the command/ammunition post is the only place where firearms are considered 'not live' and masks are not required). Leading up to the battle event, our team was instructed by the proprietors to temporarily leave the opposing team waiting at the outskirts of the battle zone, locate the "castle" hidden in the heavy brush inside the battle zone, and wait for the other team to advance on us. It was my understanding that since no individual on either team had knowledge of the 'castles' exact location, we were to first find it, get 'set-up' for battle, and then announce that we were 'ready' to begin the game by yelling "OK". Since no other 'players' visiting the establishment that day were meant to be in our battle zone, I also understood that our opponents were the only people who would be firing on us. Now, upon leaving the outskirts, it took our team nearly five minutes to find the castle. So when we were ready to begin, I would have expected that they would require roughly five minutes to get within firing range of us. Little did I know that shortly after we left the outskirts, our opponents decided not to wait for us to announce we were 'ready', and they began advancing on us to surprise us and were actually 'setting up' around our perimeter as we were getting ready - in the mean time, I had my face mask resting on top of my head temporarily (despite being told that they're required over your face at all times) because it's difficult to see when it's over your face, and I wasn't expecting our opponents to be near us just yet. As it turns out, one of our opponents had a clear shot at me and I took a paint ball in my eye. In fact, I was no more than 40 feet away from the attacker, and I was looking right at him when he fired at me. My main concern is that he was close enough to see that I wasn't wearing my mask at the time, and should not have fired in my direction until I clued in that we were under fire and should return my mask to my face. As a result, I now have permanent partial vision impairment. I understand that all players should expect all other players inside the battle zone to be wearing their mask, but we were taken by surprise, and hadn't even said "GO" or "OK" before taking fire from our opponents.

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

My response:

My opinion is you'd be wasting your time, money and efforts. You accepted the risk, and your opponent doesn't have to "do an inspection" of his enemy in such a situation. He saw an opening, and took it.

He was correct, and you were wrong. It didn't matter whether you found the mask uncomfortable, or couldn't see while you were setting up, or any other reason. You had an obligation to wear that mask, and other protections, at ALL times.

You would definately lose in court. In California, we have a similar case on the books called "Knight vs. Jewitt". It talks about the normal risks in sporting events and how the participants can't sue each other for injuries that are reasonably expected to occur in a particular sport. You can find it on the Internet. Read it. It will give you more detail and insight (no pun intended) on the responsibilities of participants in sporting events.

Bottom line is HE didn't increase the risk of injury . . . YOU increased it; that you knew you were supposed to wear the mask, and that while you were on the field of battle, so to speak, you accepted the risk by taking the mask off of your eyes.

I don't mean to sound unsympathetic to your plight - - I am sypathetic because the loss of sight is horrible and unthinkable to me. But, the law does not deal in "sympathy" and judgments are not rendered in such a fashion. Judgments are rendered on the cold, hard, facts.

In paint ball, there is no "Kings X".

Knight v. Jewitt - a summary:

P who suffers harm from which the D has no duty to protect is not entitled to recover for this harm. D was acting reasonably in the circumstances.

a. Doctrines of assumption of risk and comparative negligence overlap to some degree

1. Primary assumption of risk – where D owes no duty to protect P from a particular risk of harm, a P who has suffered such harm is not entitled to recover from D.

2. Secondary assumption of risk – D has breached duty of care owed to P, and a P, when encountering the risk of such an injury, must offset damages according to his contribution to the harm – affirmative defense to established breach of duty.


IAAL

------------------
By reading the “Response” to your question or comment, you agree that: The opinions expressed herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE" are designed to provide educational information only and are not intended to, nor do they, offer legal advice. Opinions expressed to you in this site are not intended to, nor does it, create an attorney-client relationship, nor does it constitute legal advice to any person reviewing such information. No electronic communication with "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE," on its own, will generate an attorney-client relationship, nor will it be considered an attorney-client privileged communication. You further agree that you will obtain your own attorney's advice and counsel for your questions responded to herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE."


[This message has been edited by I AM ALWAYS LIABLE (edited November 05, 2000).]

 

[qkarmark]

thanks for the response.... I kind of expected your opinion, since I feel it's the dumbest thing (not wearing the mask) I've ever done in my life (playing paintball for the first time, no less), but I have a family to raise and felt compelled to ask anyway. Plus I'm rather passive when it comes to confrontations...it's just NOT me to try to cheat the system. And don't feel too sympathetic for me...my vision in the injured eye can be corrected (somewhat) with eye wear, thank the Lord, so if I were an optimist I would say that it could be worse.... I could've been blinded and instead was really lucky!!

If you want to be sympathetic, think about the other client my Opthamologist has who was making a toy bomb he found instructions for on the 'net, and it blew up in his face and blinded both his eyes.....only 12-13 yrs old I think.