The plaintiff, a woman who had paid to witness a football game played on defendant's field, stood near the boundaries of the playing field and was hurt when hit by a player tackled at the side-line. The evidence disclosed that the field was not roped off for the minor games, that there was no policing except that done by a few school officials, and that the spectators were not required to occupy seats in the stands. Reversing the lower court, the appellate tribunal held that, under these circumstances, there was no negligence, the opinion of the majority indicating that, if there had been any negligence, the question of assumption of risk could have gone to the jury. There was a strong dissent, based upon the theory that there was sufficient evidence of negligence to take the case to the jury. Ingerson v. Shattuck School (Minn. 1931) 239 N. W. 667.

Included in

Torts Commons