Pete sues Alice for negligence. In response, Alice has asserted the doctrine of assumption of risk. Which of the following statements is most likely correct?
A. Because being struck by a cyclist is an inherent risk of rollerblading, Alice owed no duty of reasonable care toward Pete to take precautions to avoid that risk. Pete will therefore recover nothing.
B. Because being struck by a cyclist is an inherent risk of rollerblading, Alice owed no duty of reasonable care toward Pete to take precautions to avoid that risk. However, Alice has violated her duty not to act willfully or recklessly. Therefore, Alice will be fully liable for the harm she caused.
C. Even if Alice negligently struck Pete, Pete assumed the risk because being struck by a cyclist is an inherent risk of rollerblading. Pete’s recovery will therefore be reduced by the degree to which Pete’s assumption of risk overcomes Alice’s negligence.
D. Pete did not assume the risk.
Answer:D
Pete sues Alice for negligence. In response, Alice has asserted the doctrine of assumption of risk. Which of the following statements is most likely correct?
A. Because being struck by a cyclist is an inherent risk of rollerblading, Alice owed no duty of reasonable care toward Pete to take precautions to avoid that risk. Pete will therefore recover nothing. B. Because being struck by a cyclist is an inherent risk of rollerblading, Alice owed no duty of reasonable care toward Pete to take precautions to avoid that risk. However, Alice has violated her duty not to act willfully or recklessly. Therefore, Alice will be fully liable for the harm she caused. C. Even if Alice negligently struck Pete, Pete assumed the risk because being struck by a cyclist is an inherent risk of rollerblading. Pete’s recovery will therefore be reduced by the degree to which Pete’s assumption of risk overcomes Alice’s negligence. D. Pete did not assume the risk.