• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

Lawsuit Verdict of $1.2M

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Lawsuit Verdict of $1.2M

    Apoligize now if this is posted elsewhere but I looked and didn't find anything so...

    A $1.2M award to the family who sued a trainer over the death of a 21 yo woman rider.

    http://billingsgazette.com/news/stat...tml?mode=story

    I'm a bit conflicted on it- what are your thoughts???

    On one hand there are a lot of hack/dangerous so called trainers but what impact will this have for good trainers.

  • #2
    I can see it making already way over priced liability insurance going up even more.

    Comment


    • #3
      Reading the link, I don't think it would have an effect on "good" trainers.

      Plaintiff's argument was that the horse's bolting history AND the trainer's failure to provide "proper equipment" (what ever that is supposed to mean - the article doesn't specify), took the incident out to the "inherent risk" that is covered under the Wyoming Recreation Safety Act. Arguably, "good" trainers would not have a student on a horse with a known bolting history without "proper equipment".

      But as the article does not have sufficient details to really see why the jury found for the Plaintiff (or the extent of the protecting statute), it's real effect on "good" trainers is hard to guess. They could get around it (based on the little given on this case) if they just don't let a client on a horse with a known history of behavior that could cause them injury.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by kewpalace View Post
        Plaintiff's argument was that the horse's bolting history AND the trainer's failure to provide "proper equipment" (what ever that is supposed to mean - the article doesn't specify), took the incident out to the "inherent risk" that is covered under the Wyoming Recreation Safety Act.
        I agree. My guess the "proper equipment" issue was important to the case. Too bad it wasn't described more fully for readers.

        E.g. if proper equipment meant a bridle and saddle and a novice rider? Or fencing/footing...e.g. riding outside an arena on gravel? I can't imagine it was lack of helmet...I think that would be the 21 year old's own responsibility.

        I would think that there is a lot more to this story than someone falling from a horse.

        Comment

        • Original Poster

          #5
          I was thinking impact more in the line of insurance as trubandloki mentioned. I'm assuming that the trainer had insurance to cover and whenever there is a loss/payout insurance company get all panicky and make pricey changes.

          Comment


          • #6
            I have a couple thoughts on this. First I wanted more info and found this:

            http://www.injurylawnews.com/2009/12...-horse-safety/
            <A Jackson lawyer who won a $1.2 million verdict for the family of a woman who died while horseback riding hopes the judgment prompts a review of safety standards in Wyoming’s equine industry.

            The suit was filed by Leslie Barkhurst, as a representative on the estate of Kristina Barkhurst, deceased, against Wyoming resident Patricia Skinner, dba, Harmony Horsemanship for the wrongful death of 21 year old Kristina, and fraud, misrepresentation, and deceit, alleging decedent, an employee and student of Harmony, was killed while riding a horse that was not properly trained for the no- bridle techniques being used. The suit claimed the owner Skinner was not qualified and had not been able to complete the no-bridle certification program.

            Attorney in the case, Gary Shockey says Wyoming law has up to now given outdoor recreation companies almost blanket immunity from lawsuits concerning wrongful death and injuries.>

            To me it sounds like this was not somebody off the street who wanted to just ride the pretty horsies. I mean employee and student! Tell me she did not know the history of the horse. Also I think it is insulting to her memory for her family to sue over her doing something she obviously loved. If you decide to get on a horse bridleless I think you have to be aware of the risks involved. No matter how good or bad the trainer is.

            My second thought is - Will insurance companies insure anyone as a trainer? Do they ask experience or come and see the facility? Even home insurance drives around and checks to see if you have added trampoline. Seems like they took their risk by insuring someone who does bridleless training.

            Comment


            • #7
              I'm sure this is just going to make it harder or more expensive for trainers to get insured. I don't like these cases at all; I'm sure the rider knew the risks when dealing with her horse and she chose to participate anyway. I feel bad for the family, but a million dollars isn't going to bring her back.

              Comment


              • #8
                I guess it means people better not give bridle-less lessons.

                I'm not surprised there was a big verdict on that one, even in Wyoming, for two reasons:

                1. Horse had a history of bolting - oh, yes, perfect candidate for teaching bridle-less work to students.

                2. Teaching students to ride without bridles? WTF?

                Yeah, I know, I've seen videos of Lynn Palm and Rugged Lark, and some other BNT (though not so big I'd ever heard of her) riding without a bridle. But that doesn't mean Susie Q Student has any business being encouraged to ride without a bridle. Especially not by someone who's making money off teaching Susie.

                I don't think the fact that Plaintiff's decedent was an "employee" means much as far as her horse knowledge or riding skills - she could've been a kid who mucked stalls to help pay for lessons.
                I'm not ignoring the rules. I'm interpreting the rules. Tamal, The Great British Baking Show

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by caryledee View Post
                  I'm sure this is just going to make it harder or more expensive for trainers to get insured. I don't like these cases at all; I'm sure the rider knew the risks when dealing with her horse and she chose to participate anyway. I feel bad for the family, but a million dollars isn't going to bring her back.
                  "At trial, Shockey maintained the horse had a history of bolting while being ridden. That history, combined with Skinner’s alleged failure to provide the proper equipment to control the animal, took the incident out of the category of “inherent risk,” he reasoned."

                  and it also says in the article that this was a natural horsemanship trainer, and the other article talked about bridle-less riding and the trainer being unable to pass the bridle-less certification program, whatever that is... let's be honest now, shall we? it sounds like this was some NH trainer who threw the girl on an ill trained horse with no bridle, no experience and likely no helmet. seems to me like that *is* beyond inherent risk, esp if the 21yo was a beginner rider who was drinking the kool aid, so to speak... the article also mentions the problem that ANYONE can hang out a shingle to be a trainer and manicurists face more certification and scrutiny than horse trainers and that's so true and such a problem!
                  My mare wonders about all this fuss about birth control when she's only seen a handful of testicles in her entire life. Living with an intact male of my species, I feel differently! WAYSIDE

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    No matter what the circumstances - judgments and settlements like these will be the death of the horse industry.

                    It's not so much that we won't be able to afford insurance premiums - it's that companies are not going to insure equine activities. Too big a risk.

                    Something to think about.
                    Brothers and sisters, I bid you beware
                    Of giving your heart to a dog to tear.
                    -Rudyard Kipling

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Why am I not surprised it was a Natural Horsemanship trainer?

                      Only a NH trainer would even dream up teaching a horse *and* rider bridle-less at the same time. Or to think their very natural-ness would more than make up for a confirmed bolter.

                      I can understand the reason behind the lawsuit. I also see the risks this could pose down the road for other equine professionals. There's no clean end on this sh*t-stick.

                      My deepest condolences to the family of the young woman who lost her life.
                      You jump in the saddle,
                      Hold onto the bridle!
                      Jump in the line!
                      ...Belefonte

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by JSwan View Post
                        No matter what the circumstances - judgments and settlements like these will be the death of the horse industry.

                        It's not so much that we won't be able to afford insurance premiums - it's that companies are not going to insure equine activities. Too big a risk.

                        Something to think about.
                        Yes. This is our future. It's sad.
                        --o0o--

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          It certainly is sad....

                          But I don't think that it really sets a precedent for frivolous litigation within the industry.

                          Granted..not a TON of info there...but it sounds like this employer/trainer was misrepresenting herself. I would be willing to bet some $$ that this trainer had a website claiming to BE certified in bridle less or whatever. Had she not claimed that, it would be hard to prove this part:
                          fraud, misrepresentation, and deceit
                          The trainer had to have made claims SOMEWHERE that both she and the horse were certified in order to set it up, correct?

                          Further...where did thy get the info that the horse was a known bolter? That seems odd.

                          This kid was from Saratoga. (my family is from Rawlins) People in that area aren't exactly litigious IME. In fact, you're a heck of a lot more likely to die and have your family be like, "Well, that was stupid. Sucks." and move on.

                          FYI: Here's the new website...I guess she's in Canada now.

                          http://kamloops.kijiji.ca/c-pets-ani...AdIdZ169066259
                          You'd think that maybe she'd have learned something about not taking unnecessary risk w/ students...but somehow (from the pics) I don't think so.
                          A good horseman doesn't have to tell anyone...the horse already knows.

                          Might be a reason, never an excuse...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by BuddyRoo View Post

                            FYI: Here's the new website...I guess she's in Canada now.

                            http://kamloops.kijiji.ca/c-pets-ani...AdIdZ169066259
                            You'd think that maybe she'd have learned something about not taking unnecessary risk w/ students...but somehow (from the pics) I don't think so.
                            Why am I not surprised to see a carrot stick in the "trainers" hand. Why do you actually have to take the bridle off to ride bridless? Why can't you just drop the reins and ride off your seat?

                            Gees, I didn't think these NH'ers could lose any more of my respect.

                            So sorry for the family of the girl who lost her life.
                            APPSOLUTE CHOCKLATE - Photo by Kathy Colman

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I've spent many years in the liability insurance business and I have seen plenty of claims. This award is unusually high, but I think the plaintiffs' attorney proved gross negligence. No state's equine liability statute will shield someone from gross negligence. It doesn't matter if it's Wyoming or Virginia. Since gross negligence can be hard to prove, I suspect the facts of the case were favorable to the plaintiff.

                              As for insurance rates going up now, I don't think so. There are a couple of reasons -- 1)just because the jury awarded $1.2 million doesn't necessarily meant the plaintiff will collect it. If the defendant didn't have liability coverage, the plaintiff will have to collect from the defendant's assets. 2)the defendant can appeal and get the award reduced. This happens often. 3)PL rates increases have to be approved by each state insurance department and must be based on loss experience. Insurance carriers build models that project losses; for all we know the total losses for this line of business may be small this year.

                              And I respectifully must disagree with trubandloki's comment about overpriced liability insurance. The liability portion of my CGL policy for my farm is about $1000; the rest of the premium is for property coverage. Even if I get sued for a frivilous reason, I am going to need a lawyer to defend me and its going to cost more than $1K to clear up this matter. Around here that's about 2.5 hours of billable time with an attorney. I actually think equine liability rates are a good value for the protection you get.
                              Where Fjeral Norwegian Fjords Rule
                              http://www.ironwood-farm.com

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                I think 1.2 is actually low for a wrongful death suit on a 21 year old.

                                Insurance companies could charge different rates for certified instructors and support programs that teach safe methods and do the testing. Or read up on the industry they insure and just not insure trainers who teach dangerous methods or charge them more?

                                Trainers can avoid lawsuits by putting people on safe horses and using tack. I ride without tack, but I sure don't teach it and the lesson barns where I used to do that sure did not support my habits. This was 1+1 of mistakes. Unsafe horse and not industry standards of care and equipment. One or the other might have been OK, but it was a deadly combo. It deserved discouragement by monetary means.

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  "Certification"..by whom, and who's standard and what makes that person the be all end all to decide. What a crock.

                                  I think it is a sad day. For all involved in the accident and the horse industry.

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    Wow. I looked on the website, and one of the pics sure looks like someone riding bridleless. After she got someone killed doing just that.
                                    I'm not ignoring the rules. I'm interpreting the rules. Tamal, The Great British Baking Show

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      I also just looked at the website. Those youngsters are riding in rope halters with a rope rein. A rope halter and rope rein are NOT a bridle and would have little effect in stopping a bolt.

                                      Also, the site states "If you are a beginner you will learn practical safe and fun horsemanship..."

                                      Children with no saddles and only rope halters/reins do not make for safe!!!
                                      Unfortunately this wrongful death suit is haveing no effect on this woman trying to kill someone else's child.

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        A bit of an aside.

                                        Quoted from the article:

                                        “Once you are practically totally immune from being sued, the notion of having safety standards, particularly in equine, there is no incentive for the industry to regulate itself,” he said.

                                        UMMM. Go ride or parasail or [insert dangerous activity here] in Mexico or Guatemala with a guide who could write the book for dangerous equipment, animals and a complete lack of regard for life - human or horse.... who is only interested in separating you from your money.

                                        THAT will learn ya what immunity from being sued means. The notion of suing anyone for anything down there is ludicrous. This case demonstrates that there is not immunity from being sued and the system worked as it should.

                                        At least in this case, the family was able to get some compensation, although not nearly enough in my opinion, from this trainer who continues to display poor and dangerous decision making on her website. In a just world, that wingnut of a trainer would no longer be allowed to teach anyone. I don't see how a judgement against someone like that would hurt good trainers.

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X