Hellriegel v. Tholl
Supreme Court of Washington
69 Wn.2d 97, 417 P.2d 362 (1966)
- Written by Nicholas Decoster, JD
Facts
Dicka Hellriegel was playing with several of his friends near Lake Washington. After the topic of conversation shifted to throwing people in the lake, Dicka said that he couldn’t be thrown into the lake even if his friends tried. In response, three of Dicka’s male friends (Boys) (defendants) attempted to throw Dicka into the lake. Dicka resisted and was participating in the ensuing horseplay when one of the Boys slipped and fell on the back of Dicka’s head. Dicka heard two cracks and yelled that he had been paralyzed. Dieter Hellriegel (plaintiff), Dicka’s father, brought suit against the Boys to recover for Dicka’s injuries. At trial, Hellriegel claimed that Dicka was eligible to recover under a theory of battery, or offensive and unconsented touching. The trial court dismissed Hellriegel’s claims, finding that Dicka had consented to the horseplay that led to his injury and, as a result, had failed to establish a prima facie case to support the claims. Hellriegel appealed the decision.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Donworth, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 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.
