Court punts college soccer player's concussion lawsuit

This lawsuit arose out of a college soccer game. The plaintiff is a student-athlete who was playing in the match and sustained a concussion after being struck in the head by a soccer ball. The plaintiff stayed in the soccer game and claimed that his injuries were exacerbated by continuing to play.

He later brought suit against the college, head soccer team coach, and many other parties associated with the athletic department and the college, alleging that they should have seen the symptoms of the concussion and removed him from the game.

Molloy College, and associated defendants, argued that the primary assumption of risk doctrine should be applied because the risks of such a sporting activity are known by or perfectly obvious to a voluntary participant, and thus summary judgment should be found in their favor.

The plaintiff alleged that the doctrine did not apply in the case because the defendants acted negligently or recklessly in leaving the plaintiff in the game. The lower court granted the defendants’ motions for summary judgment.

The Appellate Division upheld the lower court’s decision under a theory which states that “risks inherent in a sporting activity are those which are known, apparent, natural, or reasonably foreseeable consequences of the participation.”

The court found that there was no evidence supporting the plaintiff’s argument that he had clearly sustained a concussion or showed any signs of a concussion as he remained in the game. The court also noted that taking a soccer ball to the head, resulting in a concussion is a reasonable and calculable risk in playing soccer.

Insurance industry impact

Assumption of risk is a defense in tort law that bars or reduces a plaintiff’s right to recovery against a negligent defendant if that defendant can show that the plaintiff voluntarily and knowingly assumed the risks at issue inherent to the dangerous activity in which the plaintiff was participating.

This editor also participates in soccer activities, (albeit at the indoor, co-ed, recreational level, not the collegiate level.) Although I would not necessarily consider soccer a “dangerous activity,” when stepping onto the soccer field, players assume the risk of playing the game. Normally there probably would not be an actionable offense associated with a concussion received in normal game-play, but in this case, the plaintiff alleged negligence on the part of several parties for not noticing that he had suffered a concussion.

Hannah Smith (hsmith@alm.com) is editor of the Insurance Coverage Law Center (formerly FC&S Legal), which delivers the most comprehensive expert analysis of current legal and policy developments that insurance coverage attorneys rely on to provide daily actionable counsel to their clients.

See also:

• Assigning liability in the Kobe Bryant helicopter crash
• Is a mobile gym a vehicle or premise?
• Claim denied after busy basketballers damage roof tiles