The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Every year, McDonald's Corporation (McDonald's) sponsors a recreational outing for its employees. P was employed by McDonald's from May 1986 to February 1988. While she was working for McDonald's, P attended the annual company picnic which was held that year at D. One of the events at the picnic -- a 'mini Olympics' -- involved a timed obstacle course. To mount a slide backward was the first hurdle. Participants were instructed to clamber up the slippery slope of an ordinary playground slide and climb down the stairs on the back of the slide. The slide presented no latent danger. P concedes that the slide was in good repair -- it was stable and possessed firm handrails. The only risk, then, was that inherent in the reversal of its normal use. P competed in this event. P descended the ladder portion of the slide. Despite her caution, P slipped and fell from the second stair from the top, severely injuring her ankle. P sued D for failing to warn her of the possibility of injury and to provide safe apparatus for the mini Olympics. D moved for summary judgment on both claims. D claimed that it was not obliged to warn of the glaringly obvious risk of a fall faced by anyone who climbs up the chute of a slide and descends by the ladder. D contended that P's free and informed decision to mount the slide rendered her conduct the sole proximate cause of her injury or, in the alternative, statutorily barred her from recovery because she was more than fifty percent contributorily negligent. The court granted D summary judgment; Illinois imposes no duty to warn of such open and obvious risks. The court also ruled that D had voluntarily assumed the risk. P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.