Wycoff v. Grace Community Church of the Assemblies of God
2010 Colo. App. LEXIS 1832
| Colo. Ct. App. | 2010Background
- Plaintiff Taylor Wycoff, seventeen, injured during Grace Community Church's Winterama 2005 at Glacier View Ranch.
- Grace contracted with SDA for the event; Grace sponsored activities and provided lodging and meals.
- Plaintiff's father paid Grace $40; Grace issued a one-page registration form alleged to release liability.
- Plaintiff crashed on an ATV-towed inner tube around a lake with a fixed boulder hazard; injuries were severe.
- Jury awarded over $4 million against Grace; trial court reduced to $2 million (insurance limits) and later to award unreduced amounts for plaintiff and insurer.
- Court remands to enter judgment for the full amount without insurance-imposed reductions; issues include release enforceability, premises liability status, and related evidentiary matters.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enforceability of parental waiver under § 13-22-107 | Wycoff argues waiver valid if informed and voluntary; form insufficiently discloses risks. | Grace contends waiver complies with statute and releases prospective claims. | Release invalid as a matter of law; insufficient to release personal injury claims. |
| Grace's status under Premises Liability Act (landowner; invitee vs licensee) | Wycoff was an invitee given Grace's invitation and mutual interest in activity. | Grace contends Wycoff was a social guest/licensee; limited duties. | Grace is a landowner; Wycoff is an invitee, not a licensee. |
| Affirmative defense of parental waiver and trial court’s handling | Waiver should have been submitted to jury as an affirmative defense if sufficient. | Waiver should be resolved by court as a matter of law. | Trial court erred by precluding jury consideration of waiver; remand for new trial on waiver issue. |
| Admissibility of ATV rental contract evidence | Contract lacked relevance to plaintiff's danger and awareness of risk. | Contract showed activity context and care standards. | Evidentiary ruling not abused; contract admissible. |
| Judgment amount vs insurance limits; prejudgment interest | Full jury verdict should exceed insurance limits; prejudgment interest permissible. | Judgment should be limited by Grace's insurance policy. | Judgment should be entered for full unreduced amount; insurance only governs levy/execution extent. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jones v. Dressel, 623 P.2d 370 (Colo. 1981) (standard for validity of exculpatory clauses; informed decision above common-law)
- Cooper v. Aspen Skiing Co., 48 P.3d 1229 (Colo. 2002) (parents cannot prospectively waive child claims; policy change)
- Heil Valley Ranch, Inc. v. Simkin, 784 P.2d 781 (Colo. 1989) (release scope and implied waivers in exculpatory agreements)
- Chadwick v. Colt Ross Outfitters, Inc., 100 P.3d 465 (Colo. 2004) (exculpatory clauses—waivers scrutinized; multiple factors)
- Pierson v. Black Canyon Aggregates, Inc., 48 P.3d 1215 (Colo. 2002) (premises liability landowner scope; definition of landowner)
- O'Connor v. Boulder Colorado Sanitarium Ass'n, 105 Colo. 259 (Colo. 1939) (trust funds and execution implications for charities)
- St. Mary's Academy v. Solomon, 238 P.2d 22 (Colo. 1925) (trust fund immunity context for charitable actions)
- Michard v. Myron Stratton Home, 355 P.2d 1078 (Colo. 1960) (charitable immunity and execution considerations)
- Vigil v. Franklin, 103 P.3d 322 (Colo. 2004) (PLA notice and duty distinctions under landowner doctrine)
- St. Lukes Hospital Ass'n v. Long, 240 P.2d 917 (Colo. 1952) (trust funds vs. liability; historical context for charitable actions)