After her release from prison, Armstrong sued. The trial court granted the state's motion for summary judgment based on the doctrine of implied primary assumption of risk. Armstrong appealed.
The court of appeals held that the doctrine bars recovery if "(a) Armstrong had full subjective understanding of the nature and presence of a specific risk, and (b) she voluntarily chose to encounter the risk." Playing volleyball was voluntary. Armstrong knew that the shoes were risky before she suffered the injury and could have avoided the injury by not playing until the proper-sized shoes arrive. Thus, she is barred from recovery. The order granting summary judgment was affirmed.
See: Armstrong v. State, Washington Court of Appeals., No. 62506-3-1I (unpublished)
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
Armstrong v. State
|Cite||Washington Court of Appeals., No. 62506-3-1I|
|Level||State Court of Appeals|