Facts

On Sept. 5, 2008, plaintiffs went to a county fair. It was the morning of opening day for the fair. Martinez purchased tickets to defendant slide operator's inflatable slide called the Kraken. Martinez accompanied his young minor son, Eliseo Camacho, 4, up the slide. At the time of the accident, Eliseo weighed just 40 pounds and was only 36 inches tall.

When Eliseo got to the top of the slide, he became afraid to go down by himself. An employee of the company that owned the slide instructed Martinez to slide with his son between his legs rather than require Eliseo to go down alone, or to exit the slide via the entrance. Martinez did so, holding his son's torso with his arms and crossing his right foot over his left to help hold his son. Martinez slid down once with his child without incident. On the second time down, Martinez' body turned to the right as he went down and his left foot entered an unprotected/improperly secured seam in the slide's cover at the bottom of the slide. As a consequence, his left foot became entangled and his body flipped up, forward and around, and the bones in his left ankle fractured in three locations before his leg came free of the cover.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
As to defendant manufacturer, plaintiffs' safety consultant, Ed Pribonic, PE, opined that the slide suffered from a serious design defect. The slide comes with a slide mat that covers and protects the inflatable's surface and extends out over the exit of the slide area at the bottom. The slide mat is attached to the slide with velcro. However, the portion of the slide mat that covered a portion of the exit at the bottom of the slide closest to the right side wall did not have velcro to securely fasten it to the slide, creating a hazardous point of entanglement in violation of applicable ASTM Standards on Amusement Rides and Devices. Plaintiffs' contended that, had the slide mat been properly designed such that it was securely fastened to the slide in the entire area, this accident would likely have been prevented.

As to defendant slide operator, Pribonic opined that defendant failed to properly operate the slide in compliance with ASTM Standards on Amusement Rides and Devices operating procedures and failed to operate the slide in compliance with the manufacturer's requirements. ASTM Standards on Amusement Rides and Devices Section F 6374-06(6) requires that at all time there be a fully trained operator controlling and advising participants in the safe use of the slide. Based on the testimony of defendant slide operator's president, neither the operator in control of the entrance and egress of the slide nor the employee manning the ticket booth were trained in accordance with the Industry Standards.

Furthermore, according to plaintiffs, the operator was not present at the time of the accident because he had taken a rest break, leaving the ticket booth operator in charge of the Slide.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant slide operator denied that it was negligent in its operation of the slide. Defendant slide operator contended that defendant manufacturer was solely responsible for the malfunctioning of the slide.

Defendant manufacturer contended that the slide was safe to operate at the time it placed the product in the stream of commerce.

Specials in Evidence

$44,516 $85,000

Injuries

Left ankle fractured in three locations. Plaintiff underwent open reduction surgery.

Result

The case settled for $315,000.

Other Information

Filing Date: March 3, 2009.