Amezcua v. Los Angeles Harley-Davidson, Inc.
132 Cal. Rptr. 3d 567
Cal. Ct. App.2011Background
- Amezcuas sued Harley-Davidson for injuries from the 2006 Toy Ride collision.
- Ride was Harley-Davidson organized; participants signed a release; Amezcuas did not register or sign the waiver.
- Los Angeles County Police Department escorted the ride; route included freeway segments and hospital arrival.
- Accident involved a van and motorcycles within the procession causing collisions with the Amezcua vehicle.
- Trial court granted summary judgment on primary assumption of risk; held no duty owed by Harley-Davidson.
- Court affirms, holding riding in a motorcycle procession on public highways falls within primary assumption of risk and Harley-Davidson did not increase inherent risk.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does primary assumption of risk bar the Amezcua claims? | Amezcua contends no bar without a written waiver. | Harley-Davidson argues activity inherently risky; waiver not required for coparticipant duty. | Yes, primary assumption of risk bars the claims. |
| Did Harley-Davidson owe a duty to participants in the Toy Ride? | Amezcua asserts duty to protect riders. | No duty beyond inherent risk; activity itself limits duty. | No duty beyond inherent risks; activity governed by primary assumption. |
| Was the waiver/exculpatory agreement enforceable? | Waiver should shield Harley-Davidson. | Waiver part of registration; nonregistrant still bound by implied risk. | Not necessary to decide due to complete bar by assumption of risk. |
| Did Harley-Davidson increase the inherent risk of the activity? | Defendant intensified risk via organization. | No evidence of increased risk beyond inherent dangers of a parade ride. | Harley-Davidson did not increase inherent risk. |
| Is there joint liability with Los Angeles County PD? | County involvement contributed to risk. | Escort role did not create duty to protect beyond inherent risk. | Not addressed as separate liability given complete bar by assumption of risk. |
Key Cases Cited
- Knight v. Jewett, 3 Cal.4th 296 (Cal. 1992) (distinguishes primary vs secondary assumption of risk; duty depends on activity and relationship)
- Ford v. Gouin, 3 Cal.4th 339 (Cal. 1992) (applies primary assumption of risk to noncompetitive recreational activity)
- Record v. Reason, 73 Cal.App.4th 472 (Cal. App. 1999) (defines sport for purposes of primary assumption of risk)
- Moser v. Ratinoff, 105 Cal.App.4th 1211 (Cal. App. 2003) (extends primary assumption of risk to organized, noncompetitive activity)
- Beninati v. Black Rock City, LLC, 175 Cal.App.4th 650 (Cal. App. 2009) (applies primary assumption of risk beyond explicit waivers; Burning Man context)
- Shannon v. Rhodes, 92 Cal.App.4th 792 (Cal. App. 2001) (limits sport notion; boat passenger generally not within Knight’s scope)
- Truong v. Nguyen, 156 Cal.App.4th 865 (Cal. App. 2007) (riding personal watercraft as sport under primary assumption of risk)
- Distefano v. Forester, 85 Cal.App.4th 1249 (Cal. App. 2001) ( motorcycle off-road; inherent risk analysis under primary assumption of risk)
- Levinson v. Owens, 176 Cal.App.4th 1534 (Cal. App. 2009) (host liability distinctions in primary assumption of risk contexts)
- Saffro v. Elite Racing, Inc., 98 Cal.App.4th 173 (Cal. App. 2002) (organizational expectations and risk allocation in events)
- Luna v. Vela, 169 Cal.App.4th 102 (Cal. App. 2008) (duty to avoid increasing inherent risk; setting limits on organizer duty)