Cheong v. Antablin
California Supreme Court
946 P.2d 817 (1997)
- Written by Nicholas Decoster, JD
Facts
On April 11, 1991, Wilkie Cheong (plaintiff) and Drew Antablin (defendant) went for a ski trip together. Both were experienced skiers, but they collided with one another, and Cheong was injured. Cheong sued Antablin for negligence. At trial, Antablin denied intentionally crashing into Cheong or skiing recklessly, and Cheong conceded that he did not believe Antablin had acted recklessly. Antablin’s motion for summary judgment was granted by the superior court, which found that the risk of a collision was an inherent risk of downhill skiing and that Cheong had assumed that risk by willingly participating in the sport. Cheong appealed, but the court of appeals affirmed the decision. Cheong appealed again, arguing that the doctrine of assumption of the risk did not apply to an individual sport such as skiing.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Chin, J.)
Concurrence (Kennard, J.)
Concurrence (Mosk, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.