Parish v. Jumpking, Inc.

719 N.W.2d 540 (2006)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Delbert Parish and Shelley Tatro purchased a Jumpking fourteen-foot trampoline for use in their backyard. They set up the trampoline, and Delbert tried it out by attempting a somersault. He nearly fell off the trampoline, prompting Delbert and Shelley to purchase a 'fun ring'- a netlike enclosure with one entry point onto the trampoline. P was visiting his brother on September 11, 1999. P attempted to do a back somersault on the trampoline, but he landed on his head and was rendered a quadriplegic. P filed suit, on his own behalf and behalf of his minor son, against D, as designer and manufacturer of the trampoline and its enclosure. The district court entered summary judgment against P on all claims. P appealed claiming there was error because there were genuine issues of material fact on his design-defect claim, and the adequacy of D's warnings. He also contends that the 'open and obvious' defense is not applicable to a design-defect case, and in any event, there was an issue of material fact as to its application here.