Earlier this month, an appellate court in California issued a written opinion in a motorcycle accident case requiring the court to determine if the plaintiff assumed the risk of injury involved in riding a dirt bike. Specifically, the court was tasked with determining whether the defendant’s reckless conduct exposed the plaintiff to risks above and beyond those normally encountered while riding a dirt bike. Ultimately, the court concluded that the plaintiff assumed the risk of injury by riding the dirt bike and that the defendant did not expose her to additional risks. This concept may be relevant to Maryland motorcycle accident victims as well.
The plaintiff and the defendant were in a relationship. The plaintiff was new to riding dirt bikes when she met the defendant, but the two made the activity a joint hobby. One day, the couple decided to take about a two-hour ride to some dunes. The plaintiff was hesitant, and she explained to the defendant that she did not like riding in sand because it made her uncomfortable. Evidently, the defendant was present one time when the plaintiff fell while riding in sand.
The defendant “guaranteed” that there was a hard-packed dirt road the whole way and that the plaintiff would not have to ride in the sand. The plaintiff then reluctantly agreed to go.