{"id":489,"date":"2021-10-25T03:57:42","date_gmt":"2021-10-25T03:57:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/?page_id=489"},"modified":"2022-05-02T21:50:48","modified_gmt":"2022-05-02T21:50:48","slug":"caci-470-primary-assumption-of-risk-exception-to-nonliability-coparticipant-in-sport-or-other-recreational-activity","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-470-primary-assumption-of-risk-exception-to-nonliability-coparticipant-in-sport-or-other-recreational-activity\/","title":{"rendered":"CACI 470 Primary Assumption of Risk\u2014Exception to Nonliability\u2014Coparticipant in Sport or Other Recreational Activity"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<style type=\"text\/css\" data-created_by=\"avia_inline_auto\" id=\"style-css-av-ku5gm352-588fb254248d6912a95d95ab1ce79ab1\">\n#top .av-special-heading.av-ku5gm352-588fb254248d6912a95d95ab1ce79ab1{\npadding-bottom:10px;\n}\nbody .av-special-heading.av-ku5gm352-588fb254248d6912a95d95ab1ce79ab1 .av-special-heading-tag .heading-char{\nfont-size:25px;\n}\n.av-special-heading.av-ku5gm352-588fb254248d6912a95d95ab1ce79ab1 .av-subheading{\nfont-size:15px;\n}\n<\/style>\n<div  class='av-special-heading av-ku5gm352-588fb254248d6912a95d95ab1ce79ab1 av-special-heading-h1 blockquote modern-quote  avia-builder-el-0  el_before_av_hr  avia-builder-el-first '><h1 class='av-special-heading-tag '  itemprop=\"headline\"  >CACI 470 Primary Assumption of Risk\u2014Exception to Nonliability\u2014Coparticipant in Sport or Other Recreational Activity<\/h1><div class='av-subheading av-subheading_below'><p>California Civil Jury Instructions CACI<\/p>\n<\/div><div class=\"special-heading-border\"><div class=\"special-heading-inner-border\"><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n<div  class='hr av-av_hr-91d7ccd583a503147498e120fee2ff9b hr-default  avia-builder-el-1  el_after_av_heading  el_before_avia_sc_search '><span class='hr-inner '><span class=\"hr-inner-style\"><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n\n<style type=\"text\/css\" data-created_by=\"avia_inline_auto\" id=\"style-css-av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7\">\n#top .avia_search_element.av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7 .av_searchform_wrapper{\nborder-radius:0px 0px 0px 0px;\nborder-color:#edae44;\nbackground-color:#edae44;\n}\n#top .avia_search_element.av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7 #s.av-input-field{\nborder-radius:0px 0px 0px 0px;\n}\n#top .avia_search_element.av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7 #searchsubmit{\nborder-radius:0px 0px 0px 0px;\n}\n#top .avia_search_element.av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7 .av_searchsubmit_wrapper{\nborder-radius:0px 0px 0px 0px;\n}\n.ajax_search_response.av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7{\npadding:0px 0px 0px 0px;\nmargin:0px 0px 0px 0px;\n}\n<\/style>\n<div  class='avia_search_element av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7  avia-builder-el-2  el_after_av_hr  el_before_av_textblock '><search><form action='https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/' id='searchform_element' method='get' class='' data-element_id='av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7' ><div class='av_searchform_wrapper'><input type='search' value='' id='s' name='s' placeholder='Search CACI' aria-label='Search CACI' class='av-input-field ' required \/><div class='av_searchsubmit_wrapper '><input type='submit' value='Find' id='searchsubmit' class='button ' title='View results on search page' aria-label='View results on search page' \/><\/div><input type='hidden' name='numberposts' value='8' \/><input type='hidden' name='post_type' value='page' \/><input type='hidden' name='results_hide_fields' value='post_titles,meta,image' \/><\/div><\/form><\/search><\/div>\n<section  class='av_textblock_section av-av_textblock-e878f05c31dff72941bf1e49a00d9ff5 '   itemscope=\"itemscope\" itemtype=\"https:\/\/schema.org\/CreativeWork\" ><div class='avia_textblock'  itemprop=\"text\" ><ul>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/\">CACI Jury Instructions Index<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/caci-fillable-forms.crowdsourcelawyers.com\/\">App: CACI Jury Instructions Fillable Forms Word Format<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/section>\n<div  class='hr av-av_hr-91d7ccd583a503147498e120fee2ff9b hr-default  avia-builder-el-4  el_after_av_textblock  el_before_av_textblock '><span class='hr-inner '><span class=\"hr-inner-style\"><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n\n<style type=\"text\/css\" data-created_by=\"avia_inline_auto\" id=\"style-css-av-ku5gnler-ef707c93035afbe4f8a65111f2a73955\">\n#top .av_textblock_section.av-ku5gnler-ef707c93035afbe4f8a65111f2a73955 .avia_textblock{\nfont-size:20px;\n}\n<\/style>\n<section  class='av_textblock_section av-ku5gnler-ef707c93035afbe4f8a65111f2a73955 '   itemscope=\"itemscope\" itemtype=\"https:\/\/schema.org\/CreativeWork\" ><div class='avia_textblock'  itemprop=\"text\" ><h2 class=\"SS_Banner\">470\u00a0Primary Assumption of Risk\u2014Exception to Nonliability\u2014Coparticipant in Sport or Other Recreational Activity<\/h2>\n<hr \/>\n<p><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">[<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Name of plaintiff<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] claims [he\/she\/<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">nonbinary pronoun<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] was harmed while participating in [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">specify sport or other recreational activity, e.g., touch football<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] and that [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of defendant<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] is responsible for that harm. To establish this claim, [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of plaintiff<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] must prove all of the following:<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\"><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">1.<\/span><\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\"><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">That [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of defendant<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] either intentionally injured [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of plaintiff<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] or acted so recklessly that [his\/her\/<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">nonbinary pronoun<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] conduct was entirely outside the range of ordinary activity involved in [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">e.g., touch football<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">];<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\"><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">2.<\/span><\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\"><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">That [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of plaintiff<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] was harmed; and<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\"><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">3.<\/span><\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\"><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">That [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of defendant<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">]\u2019s conduct was a substantial factor in causing [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of plaintiff<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">]\u2019s harm.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">Conduct is entirely outside the range of ordinary activity involved in [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">e.g., touch football<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] if that conduct (1) increased the risks to [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of plaintiff<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] over and above those inherent in [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">e.g., touch football<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">], and (2) it can be prohibited without discouraging vigorous participation or otherwise fundamentally changing the [sport\/activity].<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">[<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Name of defendant<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] is not responsible for an injury resulting from conduct that was merely accidental, careless, or negligent. <br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><\/span><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<div class=\"SS_Note\">\n<h2 class=\"SS_HideShowSection SS_Expandable\"><\/h2>\n<div id=\"TRNotes_n_1\">\n<p><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">New September 2003; Revised April 2004, October 2008, April 2009, December 2011, December 2013; Revised and Renumbered From CACI No. 408 May 2017; Revised May 2018 <br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><\/span><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/\">Crowdsource Lawyers<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\">https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci<\/a><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\"><br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><\/span><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"SS_Note\">\n<h2 class=\"SS_HideShowSection SS_Expandable\">Directions for Use<\/h2>\n<div id=\"TRNotes_n_2\">\n<p>This instruction sets forth a plaintiff\u2019s response to the affirmative defense of primary assumption of risk asserted by a defendant who was a coparticipant in the sport or other recreational activity. For an instruction applicable to coaches, instructors, or trainers, see\u00a0CACI No. 471,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Primary Assumption of Risk\u2014Exception to Nonliability\u2014Instructors, Trainers, or Coaches<\/span>. For an instruction applicable to facilities owners and operators and to event sponsors, see\u00a0CACI No. 472,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Primary Assumption of Risk\u2014Exception to Nonliability\u2014Facilities Owners and Operators and Event Sponsors<\/span>. For an instruction applicable to occupations with inherent risk, see\u00a0CACI No. 473,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Primary Assumption of Risk\u2014Exception to Nonliability\u2014Occupation Involving Inherent Risk.<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Primary assumption of risk generally absolves the defendant of a duty of care toward the plaintiff with regard to injury incurred in the course of a sporting or other recreational activity covered by the doctrine. (See\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Knight v. Jewett<\/span>\u00a0(1992) 3 Cal.4th 296, 320 [11 Cal.Rptr.2d 2, 834 P.2d 696].) Element 1 sets forth the exceptions in which there is a duty.<\/p>\n<p>While duty is generally a question of law, some courts have held that whether the defendant has increased the risk beyond those inherent in the sport or activity is a question of fact for the jury. (See\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Luna v. Vela<\/span>\u00a0(2008) 169 Cal.App.4th 102, 112\u2013113 [86 Cal.Rptr.3d 588]\u00a0and cases cited therein, including cases\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">contra<\/span>.) There may also be disputed facts that must be resolved by a jury before it can be determined if the doctrine applies. (See\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Shin v. Ahn<\/span>\u00a0(2007) 42 Cal.4th 482, 486 [64 Cal.Rptr.3d 803, 165 P.3d 581].) <br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"SS_Note\">\n<h2 class=\"SS_HideShowSection SS_Expandable\">Sources and Authority<\/h2>\n<div id=\"TRNotes_n_3\">\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cPrimary assumption of risk arises where a plaintiff voluntarily participates in an activity or sport involving certain inherent risks; primary assumption of risk \u2026 bar[s] recovery because no duty of care is owed as to such risks.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Connelly v. Mammoth Mountain Ski Area<\/span>\u00a0(1995) 39 Cal.App.4th 8, 11 [45 Cal.Rptr.2d 855], internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cAlthough the doctrine is often applied as between sports coparticipants, it defines the duty owed as between persons engaged in any activity involving inherent risks. The doctrine applies to activity \u2018done for enjoyment or thrill, requires physical exertion as well as elements of skill, and involves a challenge containing a potential risk of injury\u2019 \u2026\u2009.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Jimenez v. Roseville City School Dist.<\/span>\u00a0(2016) 247 Cal.App.4th 594, 601 [202 Cal.Rptr.3d 536], internal citations omitted; see also\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Bertsch v. Mammoth Community Water Dist.<\/span>\u00a0(2016) 247 Cal.App.4th 1201, 1208 [202 Cal.Rptr.3d 757]\u00a0[\u201cThese factors certainly apply to skateboarding\u201d];\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Swigart v. Bruno<\/span>\u00a0(2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 529, 540 [220 Cal.Rptr.3d 556]\u00a0[horseback riding is an inherently dangerous sport];\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Foltz v. Johnson<\/span>\u00a0(2017) 16 Cal.App.5th 647, 656\u2013657 [224 Cal.Rptr.3d 506]\u00a0[off-road dirt bike riding].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cA coparticipant in an active sport ordinarily bears no liability for an injury resulting from conduct in the course of the sport that is merely careless or negligent.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Ford v. Gouin<\/span>\u00a0(1992) 3 Cal.4th 339, 342 [11 Cal.Rptr.2d 30, 834 P.2d 724].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201c[W]e conclude that a participant in an active sport breaches a legal duty of care to other participants\u2014i.e., engages in conduct that properly may subject him or her to financial liability\u2014only if the participant intentionally injures another player or engages in conduct that is so reckless as to be totally outside the range of the ordinary activity involved in the sport.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Knight, supra<\/span>, 3 Cal.4th at p. 320.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cThe\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Knight<\/span>\u00a0rule, however, \u2018does not grant unbridled legal immunity to all defendants participating in sporting activity. The Supreme Court has stated that \u201cit is well established that defendants generally do have a duty to use due care not to increase the risks to a participant over and above those inherent in the sport.\u201d Thus, even though \u201cdefendants generally have no legal duty to eliminate (or protect a plaintiff against) risks inherent in the sport itself,\u201d they may not increase the likelihood of injury above that which is inherent.\u2019\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Distefano v. Forester<\/span>\u00a0(2001) 85 Cal.App.4th 1249, 1261 [102 Cal.Rptr.2d 813], internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cIn\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Freeman v. Hale<\/span>, the Court of Appeal advanced a test \u2026 for determining what risks are inherent in a sport: \u2018[C]onduct is totally outside the range of ordinary activity involved in the sport (and thus any risks resulting from that conduct are not inherent to the sport) if the prohibition of that conduct would neither deter vigorous participation in the sport nor otherwise fundamentally alter the nature of the sport.\u2019\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Distefano, supra<\/span>, 85 Cal.App.4th at p. 1261.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201c[G]olfers have a limited duty of care to other players, breached only if they intentionally injure them or engage in conduct that is \u2018so reckless as to be totally outside the range of the ordinary activity involved in the sport.\u2019\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Shin, supra<\/span>, 42 Cal.4th at p. 497.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cThe [horseback] rider generally assumes the risk of injury inherent in the sport. Another person does not owe a duty to protect the rider from injury by discouraging the rider\u2019s vigorous participation in the sport or by requiring that an integral part of horseback riding be abandoned. And the person has no duty to protect the rider from the careless conduct of others participating in the sport. The person owes the horseback rider only two duties: (1) to not \u2018intentionally\u2019 injure the rider; and (2) to not \u2018increase the risk of harm beyond what is inherent in [horseback riding]\u2019 by \u2018engag[ing] in conduct that is so reckless as to be totally outside the range of the ordinary activity involved in the sport\u2019\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Levinson v. Owens<\/span>\u00a0(2009) 176 Cal.App.4th 1534, 1545\u20131546 [98 Cal.Rptr.3d 779].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201c[T]he general test is \u2018that a participant in an active sport breaches a legal duty of care to other participants\u2014i.e., engages in conduct that properly may subject him or her to financial liability\u2014only if the participant intentionally injures another player or engages in conduct that is so reckless as to be totally outside the range of the ordinary activity involved in the sport.\u2019 Although a defendant has no duty of care to a plaintiff with regard to inherent risks, a defendant still has a duty not to increase those risks.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Swigart<\/span>,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">supra<\/span>, 13 Cal.App.5th at p. 538, internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cThe question of which risks are inherent in a recreational activity is fact intensive but, on a sufficient record, may be resolved on summary judgment. Judges deciding inherent risk questions under this doctrine \u2018may consider not only their own or common experience with the recreational activity involved but may also consult case law, other published materials, and documentary evidence introduced by the parties on a motion for summary judgment.\u2019\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Foltz<\/span>,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">supra<\/span>, 16 Cal.App.5th at p. 656, internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201c[W]hether defendant breached the limited duty of care he owed other golfers by engaging in conduct that was \u2018so reckless as to be totally outside the range of the ordinary activity involved in [golf]\u2019 depends on resolution of disputed material facts. Thus, defendant\u2019s summary judgment motion was properly denied.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Shin, supra<\/span>, 42 Cal.4th at p. 486, internal citation omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cAlthough we recognize the Court of Appeal decisions specifically addressing the point are in conflict, we believe resolving this issue is not a matter of further defining [defendant]\u2019s duty, which would be a question of law for the court. Rather, it requires application of the governing standard of care (the duty not to increase the risks inherent in the sport) to the facts of this particular case\u2014the traditional role of the trier of fact. (See, e.g.,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Vine v. Bear Valley Ski Co., supra<\/span>, 118 Cal.App.4th at pp. 591\u2013592\u00a0[whether defendant\u2019s design of snowboard jump increased inherent risks of snowboarding is question for jury];\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Solis v. Kirkwood Resort Co., supra<\/span>, 94 Cal.App.4th at p. 365\u00a0[whether artificial jumps built by resort increased inherent risk of falling while skiing is question for jury];\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Lowe v. California League of Prof. Baseball<\/span>\u00a0(1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 112, 123 [65 Cal.Rptr.2d 105]\u00a0[whether distraction caused by activities of minor league baseball team\u2019s mascot increased inherent risk of spectator being hit by a foul ball \u2018is issue of fact to be resolved at trial\u2019]; but see\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Huff v. Wilkins, supra<\/span>, 138 Cal.App.4th at p. 745\u00a0[\u2018it is the trial court\u2019s province to determine whether defendants breached their duty not to increase the inherent risk of a collision [in the sport of off-roading], and it should hold a hearing for this purpose before impaneling a jury\u2019];\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">American Golf Corp. v. Superior Court<\/span>\u00a0(2000) 79 Cal.App.4th 30, 37 [93 Cal.Rptr.2d 683]\u00a0[\u2018[i]t is for the court to decide \u2026 whether the defendant has increased the risks of the activity beyond the risks inherent in the sport\u2019]; see also\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Huffman v. City of Poway<\/span>\u00a0(2000) 84 Cal.App.4th 975, 995, fn. 23 [101 Cal.Rptr.2d 325]\u00a0[indicating it is for the court to determine whether defendant\u2019s conduct increased the risk inherent in participating in a particular sport, but that trial court may receive expert testimony on the customary practices in the sport to make that determination].) [\u00b6] Our conclusion it is for the trier of fact to determine whether [defendant] breached his limited duty not to increase the risks inherent in the sport of volleyball finds solid support in the Supreme Court\u2019s most recent sports injury, primary assumption of the risk decision,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Shin v. Ahn, supra<\/span>, 42 Cal.4th 482, a case that postdates the appellate court decisions suggesting the issue is one for the court to resolve.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Luna v. Vela<\/span>\u00a0(2008) 169 Cal.App.4th 102, 112\u2013113 [86 Cal.Rptr.3d 588].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cThe determinant of duty, \u2018inherent risk,\u2019 is to be decided solely as a question of law and based on the general characteristics of the sport activity and the parties\u2019 relationship to it.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Griffin v. The Haunted Hotel, Inc.<\/span>\u00a0(2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 490, 501 [194 Cal.Rptr.3d 830].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cPrimary assumption of risk has often been applied in the context of active sports, but the doctrine also applies to other recreational activities that \u2018\u2009\u201cinvolv[e] an inherent risk of injury to voluntary participants \u2026 where the risk cannot be eliminated without altering the fundamental nature of the activity.\u201d\u2009\u2019 \u2018Where the doctrine applies to a recreational activity, operators, instructors and participants in the activity owe other participants only the duty not to act so as to increase the risk of injury over that inherent in the activity.\u2019 Coparticipants must not intentionally or recklessly injure other participants, but the doctrine is a complete defense to a claim of negligence. However, recovery for injuries caused by risks\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">not<\/span>\u00a0inherent in the activity is not barred by the doctrine.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Wolf v. Weber<\/span>\u00a0(2020) 52 Cal.App.5th 406, 410\u2013411 [266 Cal.Rptr.3d 104], original italics, internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cAdmittedly, it is sometimes said that \u2018[t]he existence and scope of a defendant\u2019s duty of care in the primary assumption of risk context \u201cis a\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">legal<\/span>\u00a0question which depends on the nature of the sport or activity \u2026 and on the parties\u2019 general relationship to the activity, and is an issue to be decided by the court, rather than the jury.\u201d\u2009\u2019 This statement of the rule is correct where there is no dispute about the inherent risks, and such cases may be resolved on summary judgment. [\u00b6] However this statement is overly broad. Although the risks inherent in\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">many<\/span>\u00a0activities are not subject to reasonable dispute (e.g., being hit with a baseball during a game), the risks inherent in\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">some<\/span>\u00a0activities are not commonly known. In such cases, expert testimony may be required \u2018\u2009\u201cfor purposes of weighing whether the inherent risks of the activity were increased by the defendant\u2019s conduct.\u201d\u2009\u2019 Thus, it is not entirely accurate to say inherent risks of an activity always present purely legal questions, because sometimes the nature of an activity and its risks must be gleaned from the evidence.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Jimenez, supra<\/span>, 247 Cal.App.4th at p. 608, original italics, internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201c[Plaintiff] has repeatedly argued that primary assumption of the risk does not apply because she did not impliedly consent to having a weight dropped on her head. However, a plaintiff\u2019s expectation does not define the limits of primary assumption of the risk. \u2018Primary assumption of risk focuses on the legal question of duty. It does not depend upon a plaintiff\u2019s implied consent to injury, nor is the plaintiff\u2019s subjective awareness or expectation relevant.\u2009\u2026\u2009.\u2019\u2009\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Cann v. Stefanec<\/span>\u00a0(2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 462, 471 [158 Cal.Rptr.3d 474].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cPrimary assumption of the risk does not depend on whether the plaintiff subjectively appreciated the risks involved in the activity; instead, the focus is an objective one that takes into consideration the risks that are \u2018\u2009\u201cinherent\u201d\u2009\u2019 in the activity at issue.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Swigart<\/span>,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">supra<\/span>, 13 Cal.App.5th at p. 538.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cA jury could find that, by using a snowboard without the retention strap, in violation of the rules of the ski resort and a county ordinance, defendant unnecessarily increased the danger that his snowboard might escape his control and injure other participants such as plaintiff. The absence of a retention strap could therefore constitute conduct not inherent to the sport which increased the risk of injury.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Campbell v. Derylo<\/span>\u00a0(1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 823, 829 [89 Cal.Rptr.2d 519].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cThe existence and scope of a defendant\u2019s duty depends on the role that defendant played in the activity. Defendants were merely the hosts of a social gathering at their cattle ranch, where [plaintiff] asked to ride one of their horses; they were not instructors and did not assume any of the responsibilities of an instructor.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Levinson,<\/span>\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">supra<\/span>, 176 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1550\u20131551, internal citation omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201c[T]he primary assumption of risk doctrine is not limited to activities classified as sports, but applies as well to other recreational activities \u2018involving an inherent risk of injury to voluntary participants \u2026 where the risk cannot be eliminated without altering the fundamental nature of the activity.\u2019\u2009\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Nalwa v. Cedar Fair, L.P.<\/span>\u00a0(2012) 55 Cal.4th 1148, 1156 [150 Cal.Rptr.3d 551, 290 P.3d 1158].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cWhether a duty exists \u2018does not turn on the reasonableness or unreasonableness of the plaintiff\u2019s conduct, but rather on [(1)] the nature of the activity or sport in which the defendant is engaged and [(2)] the relationship of the defendant and the plaintiff to that activity or sport.\u2019 It is the \u2018nature of the activity\u2019 and the parties\u2019 relationship to it that determines whether the doctrine applies\u2014not its characterization as a sporting event.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">McGarry v. Sax<\/span>\u00a0(2008) 158 Cal.App.4th 983, 999\u20131000 [70 Cal.Rptr.3d 519], internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201c[T]o the extent that \u2018\u2009\u201c\u2009\u2018a plaintiff\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">unreasonably<\/span>\u00a0undertakes to encounter a specific known risk imposed by a defendant\u2019s negligence,\u2019\u2009\u201d\u2009\u2019 he or she is subject to the defense of comparative negligence but not to an absolute defense. This type of comparative negligence has been referred to as \u2018\u2009\u201csecondary assumption of risk.\u201d\u2009\u2019 Assumption of risk that is based upon the absence of a defendant\u2019s duty of care is called \u2018\u2009\u201cprimary assumption of risk.\u201d\u2009\u2019\u2009\u2018First, in \u201cprimary assumption of risk\u201d cases\u2014where the defendant owes no duty to protect the plaintiff from a particular risk of harm\u2014a plaintiff who has suffered such harm is not entitled to recover from the defendant, whether the plaintiff\u2019s conduct in undertaking the activity was\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">reasonable<\/span>\u00a0or unreasonable. Second, in \u201csecondary assumption of risk\u201d cases\u2014involving instances in which the defendant has breached the duty of care owed to the plaintiff\u2014the defendant is not entitled to be entirely relieved of liability for an injury proximately caused by such breach, simply because the plaintiff\u2019s conduct in encountering the risk of such an injury was reasonable rather than unreasonable.\u2019\u2009\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Kindrich v. Long Beach Yacht Club<\/span>\u00a0(2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 1252, 1259 [84 Cal.Rptr.3d 824], original italics, internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cEven were we to conclude that [plaintiff]\u2019s decision to jump off the boat was a voluntary one, and that therefore he assumed a risk inherent in doing so, this is not enough to provide a complete defense. Because voluntary assumption of risk as a complete defense in a negligence action was abandoned in\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Li v. Yellow Cab Co.<\/span>\u00a0(1975) 13 Cal.3d 804, 829 [119 Cal.Rptr. 858, 532 P.2d 1226], only the absence of duty owed a plaintiff under the doctrine of primary assumption of risk would provide such a defense. But that doctrine does not come into play except when a plaintiff and a defendant are engaged in certain types of activities, such as an \u2018active sport.\u2019 That was not the case here; plaintiff was merely the passenger on a boat. Under\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Li<\/span>, he may have been contributorily negligent but this would only go to reduce the amount of damages to which he is entitled.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Kindrich, supra<\/span>, 167 Cal.App.4th at p. 1258.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cThough most cases in which the doctrine of primary assumption of risk exists involve recreational sports, the doctrine has been applied to dangerous activities in other contexts (see, e.g.,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Saville v. Sierra College<\/span>\u00a0(2005) 133 Cal.App.4th 857 [36 Cal.Rptr.3d 515]\u00a0[training in peace officer takedown maneuvers];\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Hamilton v. Martinelli &amp; Associates<\/span>\u00a0(2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 1012 [2 Cal.Rptr.3d 168]\u00a0[training on physical restraint methods];\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Aaris v. Las Virgenes Unified School Dist.<\/span>\u00a0(1998) 64 Cal.App.4th 1112 [75 Cal.Rptr.2d 801]\u00a0[practice of cheerleader routines];\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Bushnell<\/span>\u00a0[<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">v.<\/span>\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Japanese-American Religious &amp; Cultural Center<\/span>], 43 Cal.App.4th 525 [50 Cal.Rptr.2d 671]\u00a0[practice of moves in judo class]; and\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Herrle v. Estate of Marshall<\/span>\u00a0(1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 1761 [53 Cal.Rptr.2d 713]\u00a0[injury to nurse\u2019s aide by nursing home patient]).\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">McGarry, supra<\/span>, 158 Cal.App.4th at pp. 999\u20131000, internal citation omitted.) <br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><\/span><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<h2 class=\"SS_Heading\"><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\"><span class=\"SS_ib\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_ib\">Secondary Sources<\/span><\/span><\/h2>\n<div>6 Witkin, Summary of California Law (11th ed. 2017) Torts, \u00a7\u00a7\u20091496\u20131508<\/div>\n<div>1 Levy et al.,\u00a0California Torts, Ch. 4,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Comparative Negligence, Assumption of the Risk, and Related Defenses<\/span>, \u00a7\u20094.03,\u00a0Ch. 15,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">General\u00a0<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Premises Liability<\/span>, \u00a7\u200915.21 (Matthew Bender)<\/div>\n<div>23\u00a0California Forms of Pleading and Practice, Ch. 273,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Games, Sports, and Athletics<\/span>, \u00a7\u2009273.30\u00a0(Matthew Bender)<\/div>\n<div>33\u00a0California Forms of Pleading and Practice, Ch. 380,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Negligence<\/span>, \u00a7\u2009380.172\u00a0(Matthew Bender)<\/div>\n<div>16\u00a0California Points and Authorities, Ch. 165,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Negligence<\/span>, \u00a7\u2009165.401\u00a0(Matthew Bender)<\/div>\n<div class=\"SS_Note\">\n<div id=\"TRNotes_n_3\"><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/section>\n<div  class='hr av-szvup-9f62cfcde122a803c5acbde21f999291 hr-default  avia-builder-el-6  el_after_av_textblock  el_before_av_textblock '><span class='hr-inner '><span class=\"hr-inner-style\"><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n\n<style type=\"text\/css\" data-created_by=\"avia_inline_auto\" id=\"style-css-av-mh6s1-a1295c7be444586bebcc84359d74ccae\">\n#top .av_textblock_section.av-mh6s1-a1295c7be444586bebcc84359d74ccae .avia_textblock{\nfont-size:22px;\n}\n<\/style>\n<section  class='av_textblock_section av-mh6s1-a1295c7be444586bebcc84359d74ccae '   itemscope=\"itemscope\" itemtype=\"https:\/\/schema.org\/CreativeWork\" ><div class='avia_textblock'  itemprop=\"text\" ><p><a href=\"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/\">CrowdSourceLawyers.com<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div><\/section>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-489","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>CACI 470 Primary Assumption of Risk\u2014Exception to Nonliability\u2014Coparticipant in Sport or Other Recreational Activity - Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-470-primary-assumption-of-risk-exception-to-nonliability-coparticipant-in-sport-or-other-recreational-activity\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"CACI 470 Primary Assumption of Risk\u2014Exception to Nonliability\u2014Coparticipant in Sport or Other Recreational Activity - Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-470-primary-assumption-of-risk-exception-to-nonliability-coparticipant-in-sport-or-other-recreational-activity\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-05-02T21:50:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/caci-470-primary-assumption-of-risk-exception-to-nonliability-coparticipant-in-sport-or-other-recreational-activity\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/caci-470-primary-assumption-of-risk-exception-to-nonliability-coparticipant-in-sport-or-other-recreational-activity\\\/\",\"name\":\"CACI 470 Primary Assumption of Risk\u2014Exception to Nonliability\u2014Coparticipant in Sport or Other Recreational Activity - Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-10-25T03:57:42+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-05-02T21:50:48+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/caci-470-primary-assumption-of-risk-exception-to-nonliability-coparticipant-in-sport-or-other-recreational-activity\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/caci-470-primary-assumption-of-risk-exception-to-nonliability-coparticipant-in-sport-or-other-recreational-activity\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/caci-470-primary-assumption-of-risk-exception-to-nonliability-coparticipant-in-sport-or-other-recreational-activity\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/home\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"CACI 470 Primary Assumption of Risk\u2014Exception to Nonliability\u2014Coparticipant in Sport or Other Recreational Activity\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/\",\"name\":\"Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI\",\"description\":\"California Civil Jury Instructions CACI site\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"CrowdSource Lawyers\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/2\\\/2021\\\/09\\\/CrowdSource-Logo.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/2\\\/2021\\\/09\\\/CrowdSource-Logo.png\",\"width\":453,\"height\":208,\"caption\":\"CrowdSource Lawyers\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"CACI 470 Primary Assumption of Risk\u2014Exception to Nonliability\u2014Coparticipant in Sport or Other Recreational Activity - Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-470-primary-assumption-of-risk-exception-to-nonliability-coparticipant-in-sport-or-other-recreational-activity\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"CACI 470 Primary Assumption of Risk\u2014Exception to Nonliability\u2014Coparticipant in Sport or Other Recreational Activity - Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI","og_url":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-470-primary-assumption-of-risk-exception-to-nonliability-coparticipant-in-sport-or-other-recreational-activity\/","og_site_name":"Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI","article_modified_time":"2022-05-02T21:50:48+00:00","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-470-primary-assumption-of-risk-exception-to-nonliability-coparticipant-in-sport-or-other-recreational-activity\/","url":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-470-primary-assumption-of-risk-exception-to-nonliability-coparticipant-in-sport-or-other-recreational-activity\/","name":"CACI 470 Primary Assumption of Risk\u2014Exception to Nonliability\u2014Coparticipant in Sport or Other Recreational Activity - Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-10-25T03:57:42+00:00","dateModified":"2022-05-02T21:50:48+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-470-primary-assumption-of-risk-exception-to-nonliability-coparticipant-in-sport-or-other-recreational-activity\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-470-primary-assumption-of-risk-exception-to-nonliability-coparticipant-in-sport-or-other-recreational-activity\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-470-primary-assumption-of-risk-exception-to-nonliability-coparticipant-in-sport-or-other-recreational-activity\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/home\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"CACI 470 Primary Assumption of Risk\u2014Exception to Nonliability\u2014Coparticipant in Sport or Other Recreational Activity"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/#website","url":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/","name":"Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI","description":"California Civil Jury Instructions CACI site","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/#organization","name":"CrowdSource Lawyers","url":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/09\/CrowdSource-Logo.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/09\/CrowdSource-Logo.png","width":453,"height":208,"caption":"CrowdSource Lawyers"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/489","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=489"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/489\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2981,"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/489\/revisions\/2981"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=489"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}