McKay v. Self Defense Institute
Appellant injured his knee while participating in a self-defense class conducted by the Self Defense Institute ("SDI"). He sued SDI, three related business entities, and David Moeller (the owner of SDI) (respondents) for negligence.
Respondents moved for summary judgment, claiming that they owed no duty of care to appellant because he signed a release prior to participating in the class. They also argued that they did not owe him a duty of care under the doctrine of primary assumption of risk set forth in Knight v. Jewett (1992) 3 Cal.4th 296 (Knight), and that the action was barred by the "firefighter's rule." The trial court granted the motion and entered judgment in respondents' favor. This appeal followed. Court affirm.
Comments on McKay v. Self Defense Institute