|
Vol. 70, No. 11, November
1997
Drafting Exculpatory Agreements
Many of the reported cases regarding exculpatory agreements involve athletic
events and personal injury claims. Thus, the following suggestions are geared
toward such events, but the suggestions also would apply generally to other
settings. Attorneys called upon to draft exculpatory agreements for organizations
sponsoring athletic events may want to consider the following suggestions:
Be specific. Specify the:
- event's name, date and location (but be careful that the geographic
area covered by the release is not too narrowly described);
- participant's activity and commonly associated dangers;
- entity or entities being released; and
- classification of person doing the releasing (draft different forms
for participants, volunteers, spectators, and so on).
Make the release conspicuous.
Contract Law in Wisconsin
This excellent treatise helps clarify and simplify the basics of contract
law. Best of all, its perspective is Wisconsin law. Treating Wisconsin cases
and statutes, this State Bar CLE book pulls together Wisconsin answers to
the fundamental questions of contract law: Is there an enforceable contract?
What does the contract mean? Who has contract rights and obligations? Has
the contract been performed? What are the remedies?
Within the larger issues are clear, concise and comprehensive discussions
of specific issues. Finally, this book concludes with a lengthy, in-depth
presentation of useful and practical tips on drafting a contract.
Contract Law in Wisconsin,
$125, 700+ pgs, 1995 (includes 1997 supplement). To order, please call the
State Bar at (800) 728-7788 or order it
online NOW! |
- Label it a "RELEASE OF LIABILITY" or something equally clear.
- Follow the suggestions regarding conspicuousness set forth in Yauger.
1
- Separate application sections from release sections.
- Consider how the release would appear if reprinted in a supreme court
decision. 2
Be truthful. Any misstatement of material fact will void the agreement.
3
Do not be overbroad.
- Overbroad exculpatory agreements are especially susceptible to being
held invalid. 4
- State that the release does not waive liability for intentional or
reckless acts, as such claims cannot be waived, but do expressly state
the release waives claims for negligence. 5
- Do not use legal jargon. "A valid exculpatory contract must be
clear, unambiguous and unmistakable to the layperson." 6
- Provide signature lines for each person who could make a claim.
- Have spouses of participants release loss of consortium claims (or,
if not possible, understand such claims probably cannot be released by
the participant alone). 7
- If minors are participants, consider having both minors and parents
sign the release (and advise the organization that the enforceability of
such agreements is uncertain). 8
Consider including an indemnification clause.
- An indemnification clause may provide some protection to the organization,
especially where loss of consortium or minors' claims are involved.
- If including indemnification language, indicate this in the section
heading.
Consider circumstances of release signing.
- A release is more likely to be held invalid if presented "at the
gate" or when time is short. 9
- Consider prohibiting "day of" registration, especially for
endurance events such as a marathon or triathlon.
- Consider providing additional information (such as an informational
brochure discussing dangers and suggesting guidelines for minimum training)
especially to "first-timers."
- Give participants an opportunity to examine the facility or racecourse
before signing the release.
Endnotes
1 Yauger v. Skiing Enter. Inc., 206
Wis. 2d 75, 86 n.2, 557 N.W.2d 60, 64 (1996).
2 Several supreme court decisions include
a photocopy of the release as an attachment. See id. at 89, 557 N.W.2d
at 66; Arnold v. Shawano County Agric. Soc'y, 111 Wis. 2d 203, 206,
330 N.W.2d 773, 775 (1983); Richards v. Richards, 181 Wis. 2d 1007,
1012, 513 N.W.2d 113, 120 (1994).
3 Merten v. Nathan, 108 Wis. 2d 205,
214, 321 N.W.2d 173, 178 (1982); Cadek v. Great Lakes Dragaway Inc.,
58 F.3d 1209, 1212 (7th Cir. 1995).
4 Richards at 1015, 513 N.W.2d at 121.
5 Id.
6 Yauger, 206 Wis. 2d at 85, 557 N.W.2d
at 64 (emphasis added).
7 See Arnold at 214-15, 330 N.W.2d
at 779 (one spouse may not release another spouse's consortium claim); but
see Hammer v. Road America Inc., 614 F. Supp. 467, 472 (E.D. Wis.
1985)(suggesting that assumption of risk clause might act to bar loss of
consortium claim, because contributory negligence is a defense in a loss
of consortium action) aff'd mem. 793 F.2d 1296 (7th Cir. 1986).
8 See Yauger at 503, 538 N.W.2d at
841, rev'd on other grounds, 206 Wis. 2d at 88 n.3, 557 N.W.2d at 65; see
also Matter of Anderson, 17 Wis. 2d 380, 17 N.W.2d 360 (1962)(noting
although it is not uncommon for defendants to make settlement agreements
directly with a minor's parents, defendants who do such are "taking
a calculated risk," and courts generally will not enforce such settlement
and release agreements); Halbam v. Lemke, 99 Wis. 2d 241, 198 N.W.2d
562 (1980)(minor's contracts for nonnecessities are voidable at the minor's
option); ß 807.01, Stats. (requiring court approval of post-injury
release and settlement agreements); Arnold, 111 Wis. 2d at 214-15,
330 N.W.2d at 779 (one spouse cannot release the other spouse's loss of
consortium claims).
9 Eder v. Lake Geneva Raceway Inc.,
187 Wis. 2d 596, 606, 523 N.W.2d 429, 432 (Ct. App. 1994). |