Mid-Ohio waiver having a hard time signing

[redkow97]

"negligence" and "gross negligence" are tricky terms. You can usually waive a party's liability for negligence, like the ambulance accidentally running you over when they come to rescue you.

That's a foreseeable risk.

But if it happens because the ambulance driver is drunk, then that escalates to gross negligence, and no waiver is going to protect the track.

The bottom line is that I trust the Mid-Ohio staff to do their best to protect and help injured riders. IF they accidentally do more harm than good, the waiver protects them from lawsuits. If they're fucktards (legal term) and do something far beyond the foreseeable scope of consent, then the waiver becomes useless in front of a jury.

It's all about what a jury finds reasonable to waive. The medical staff tripping while attempting to help is one thing. Being drunk on the job, or lying about their qualifications is another.

[RVTPilot]

I am for hire.

Do you do holiday parties? Cuz that might keep the in-laws from inviting me back next year. I would pay handsomely for that.

[MidgetTodd]

I excel at making awkward family moments.

[Scruit]

The difference between negligence and gross negligence is up to the jury to decide. Then it's a crapshoot, really.

- If I sue for bruised ribs from CPR then I should get laughed out of court.

- If the medic is drunk and crashes his ambulance into me as he arrives, then someone better crack out a checkbook.

What if the track officials rush the medics to extract me quickly from a stable wreck purely so that the race can continue, and in rush they fail to follow spine protocols and leave me paralyzed...?

[jblosser]

I challenge you at all aspects of spaghetti consumption.

In.

ORdN gastronomic feats of gluttony sometime this winter. I'll schedule something.

[redkow97]

What if the track officials rush the medics to extract me quickly from a stable wreck purely so that the race can continue, and in rush they fail to follow spine protocols and leave me paralyzed...?

As you said, it would be a jury's call as to whether or not that was a foreseeable and waivable occurrence.

Is that what I consented to when I signed the form?

Realistically, no defendant would ever admit that their motive for the hasty move was so a race could continue. If that came out via a witness, then the track would look like they were trying to cover up the alleged order, and a jury wouldn't like that.

Racing is dangerous enough without adding in further, unnecessary risks. I assume the track would settle rather than risk losing a big case. And the plaintiff would likely hire an attorney on a contingent fee agreement, so they have nothing to lose by going to court.

[TSB67]

It's a standard waiver. Everybody is just trying to cover their ass. Too many tools suing over injuries from obviously dangerous activities.

You'd love the waiver from when I went skydiving. I had to read and initial like 14 pages and watch a video of their lawyer explaining it before I signed. There was "intentional or unintentional" verbage in there that basically said if they killed me on purpose no one could sue.

The biggest problem with this country is everybody expects their safety to be guaranteed.

Playing devils advocate: if you're worried about retaining your ability to sue, you already made the mistake of reading the thing and posting for the record that you actually have an understanding of what it means.

I just sign whatever they hand me and continue on my way.