SHREVEPORT, La. (Legal Newsline) - A woman who argued the operators of a go-kart track could have protected her daughter from injury if they had activated a “kill switch” stopping all the karts has no case partly because such a device would defy the laws of physics, a Louisiana appeals court ruled.
Cardenna Watts sued Party Central Fun Center and its insurer after an August 2019 accident that left her eight-year-old daughter with a broken jaw, concussion and torn pancreas. Her daughter had climbed aboard a “Rookie Kart” just before closing time and after several laps ran headfirst into a guard rail.
Track video shows two other karts hit her stopped vehicle a few seconds later and another one a few seconds after that. An attendant pulled her out of the kart and her mother took her home, unaware of her injuries, which ultimately generated $80,000 in medical expenses.
Watts initially sued Party Central, its insurer and the manufacturer of the kart, but eventually the case came down to her allegation the center was understaffed and employees failed to activate a “kill switch” to stop the other karts after her daughter ran into the wall. A trial court dismissed the case, citing warnings that drivers participate at their own risk and finding that Watts failed to present any evidence Party Central could have done more to prevent her daughter’s injuries.
Louisiana’s Second Court of Appeal, in a Jan. 12 decision, affirmed the dismissal, stating “the proprietor of a place of amusement is not the insurer of the safety of his patrons.”
At the trial court, Watts’ lawyer argued that “if the cars had been slown [sic] down, there’s a possibility that she would not’ve been injured.” Watts also claimed the third cart hit her daughter’s vehicle at high speed 10 seconds after she hit the wall.
Video revealed the last impact was 7 seconds after she hit the wall, however, and was a “glancing blow,” not a direct collision. More importantly, testimony established the “kill switch” was a “kart commander” that placed the karts in idle but didn’t stop them immediately.
“The record lacks any evidence to show that a true `kill switch,’ with a capacity to stop all motion instantly, is possible from the standpoint of physics, or even desirable from a standpoint of safety,” the appeals court observed.
Under Louisiana law, as in other states, tort plaintiffs must prove the defendant had a duty, breached it, and that breach was the cause of the plaintiff’s injuries. Watts established the first element, the appeals court said, but failed to present any proof that Party Central created an unreasonably unsafe environment for her daughter or did anything that caused her injuries. Rather, the court said, her daughter’s “unfortunate loss of control several minutes into the ride was the cause of her injuries.”