Michigan Supreme Court rules that releases signed by parents are unenforceable against minors against minors
The Michigan Supreme Court recently ruled that absent special circumstances, a parental preinjury waiver is unenforceable under Michigan's common law, because a parent has no authority to bind his or her child by contract. The ruling is the result of a case where a child had his birthday party at an indoor play area that contained inflatable equipment. Before the party, the child's father signed a liability waiver on the child's behalf. During the party, the child jumped off a slide and broke his leg. The child, through his mother, sued alleging negligence, gross negligence, and a violation of the Michigan Consumer Protection Act. The Michigan Supreme Court held that a guardian, including a parent, cannot contractually bind his or her minor ward.
TIP: Releases obtained by Michigan parents on behalf of their minor children may not be enforceable. Promotion sponsors and event organizers will have to evaluate the risk/reward associated with including minors (under 18) who are MI residents.
Popular related articles
-
In M&A transactions, many lawyers assume that intellectual property (IP) rights will automatically transfer with the purchase and that IP issues can be cured by general representations and warranties.
-
On June 9, 2010, responding to Iran's continued refusal to suspend its nuclear enrichment program and accept international safeguards, the United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 1929.
-
The following is a list of typical "showstoppers" that can derail an M&A transaction or result in a reduction of the purchase price.
-
In M&A transactions, many lawyers (and clients) assume that employee benefits issues are tangential to the overall business deal and will "work themselves out" after the deal closes.
-
In the myriad M&A transactions, for the technology company, hospital chain, pharmaceutical company or consulting firm, the M&A professional's thoughts turn to supply contracts, union and pension obligations, intellectual property, key executives, debt levels and, of course, earnings.
-
Where a solicitor executed the signature page of a loan agreement and subsequently agreed to completion on the telephone, he was signifying his unequivocal agreement to be bound by the terms of the agreement, its schedules and appendices, in the forms last exchanged in emails between the parties.
-
A person may choose to respond to a disparaging newspaper article through their solicitor.
-
Although this case involved a local authority it will be of interest to universities and colleges.
-
NSW has passed new intestacy laws which change the way that an estate is distributed when a person dies without a will.
-
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit gave preclusive effect to a California divorce decree adjudicating ownership rights to the patents-in-suit and affirmed the district court’s denial of a defendant’s motion to dismiss the case for lack of standing.
-
Australian professional tennis player, Lleyton Hewitt, has been unsuccessful in challenging the registration of a 'COME-ON' logo owned by John Patrick Sheils (Sheils).
-
A warning should be attached to all letters of intent: Danger! This letter can seriously damage your bank balance.
-
The High Court has in the past month ruled on two challenges to company voluntary arrangements (CVAs) on the grounds of unfair prejudice and material irregularity, reaching a different conclusion in each case.
-
Where a solicitor executed the signature page of a loan agreement and subsequently agreed to completion on the telephone, he was signifying his unequivocal agreement to be bound by the terms of the agreement, its schedules and appendices, in the forms last exchanged in emails between the parties.
-
A recent case, Catena v Australian Securities and Investments Commission (No 2) [2010] FCA 865, illustrates the difference between inside information and information generally known to the market.
-
A complaint was filed on Aug., 12, 2010 in the Superior Court of New Jersey on behalf of a putative class of New Jersey residents alleging that Staples' "buy one get one free" offer violated the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and constituted common law fraud.
-
The United States Department of State is proposing to amend the International Traffic in Arms Regulations ("ITAR") requirements regarding dual nationals and third-country nationals employed by recipients of controlled goods and technology.
-
The patent-in-suit disclosed a software–based algorithm and method for generating and delivering messages over a phone line during a “ringing signal” period.
-
On August 20th, the Seventh Circuit affirmed a district court's finding that shares issued by Conseco qualify for the fraud-on-the-market presumption of reliance in a class action securities fraud lawsuit against Conseco's executives.
-
On August 16th, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the entry of summary judgment finding appellants civilly liable for making material misrepresentations and engaging in deceptive business practices in violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the FTC's Franchise Rule in their sale of internet kiosk business opportunities.
If you are interested in submitting an article to Lexology, please
contact Andrew Teague at ateague@lexology.com.
