Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 1911–2026 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New Jersey courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Garafano v. Neshobe Beach Club, Inc.green2 sentences2013As we explained in Hubner , “[i]n applying that analysis to the facts in Sunday , the court reasoned that the ski area operator had a duty to maintain the slopes, and that the assumption of risk doctrine could not bar suit if the injury was caused by the condition of the ‘field’ rather than by the ‘playing of the sport’ itself. [Sunday, supra, 390 A.2d at 403 ] (quoting Garafano v. Neshobe Beach Club, Inc. [ 126 Vt. 566 ], 238 A.2d 70, 76 ([Vt.] 1967)).” Hubner, supra, 203 N.J. at 199 , 1 A.3d 618 . 2013As we explained in Hubner , “[i]n applying that analysis to the facts in Sunday , the court reasoned that the ski area operator had a duty to maintain the slopes, and that the assumption of risk doctrine could not bar suit if the injury was caused by the condition of the ‘field’ rather than by the ‘playing of the sport’ itself. [Sunday, supra, 390 A.2d at 403 ] (quoting Garafano v. Neshobe Beach Club, Inc. [ 126 Vt. 566 ], 238 A.2d 70, 76 ([Vt.] 1967)).” Hubner, supra, 203 N.J. at 199 , 1 A.3d 618 . | 2 | 2 |
Hubner v. Spring Valley Equestrian Centergreen2 sentences2026Sunday eviscerated that concept by holding "the A-0058-25 9 ski area operator had a duty to maintain the slopes, and the assumption of risk doctrine could not bar suit if the injury was caused by the condition of the 'field' rather than by the 'playing of the sport' itself." Hubner v. Spring Valley Equestrian Ctr., 203 N.J. 184, 199 (2010) (quoting Sunday, 390 A.2d at 403 ). 2013As we explained in Hubner , “[i]n applying that analysis to the facts in Sunday , the court reasoned that the ski area operator had a duty to maintain the slopes, and that the assumption of risk doctrine could not bar suit if the injury was caused by the condition of the ‘field’ rather than by the ‘playing of the sport’ itself. [Sunday, supra, 390 A.2d at 403 ] (quoting Garafano v. Neshobe Beach Club, Inc. [ 126 Vt. 566 ], 238 A.2d 70, 76 ([Vt.] 1967)).” Hubner, supra, 203 N.J. at 199 , 1 A.3d 618 . | 1 | 2 |
Meistrich v. Casino Arena Attractions, Inc.green2 sentences2010See id. at 402-04 (citing Meistrich v. Casino Arena Attractions, Inc., 31 N.J. 44 , 155 A.2d 90 (1959)). 2010See id. at 402-04 (citing Meistrich v. Casino Arena Attractions, Inc., 31 N.J. 44 , 155 A.2d 90 (1959)). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Sunday v. Stratton Corp.
green
2 sentences2026Sunday eviscerated that concept by holding "the A-0058-25 9 ski area operator had a duty to maintain the slopes, and the assumption of risk doctrine could not bar suit if the injury was caused by the condition of the 'field' rather than by the 'playing of the sport' itself." Hubner v. Spring Valley Equestrian Ctr., 203 N.J. 184, 199 (2010) (quoting Sunday, 390 A.2d at 403 ). 2013As we explained in Hubner , “[i]n applying that analysis to the facts in Sunday , the court reasoned that the ski area operator had a duty to maintain the slopes, and that the assumption of risk doctrine could not bar suit if the injury was caused by the condition of the ‘field’ rather than by the ‘playing of the sport’ itself. [Sunday, supra, 390 A.2d at 403 ] (quoting Garafano v. Neshobe Beach Club, Inc. [ 126 Vt. 566 ], 238 A.2d 70, 76 ([Vt.] 1967)).” Hubner, supra, 203 N.J. at 199 , 1 A.3d 618 . | 3 | 2010–2026 |
Brett v. Great American Recreation, Inc.
green
1 sentence2026Sunday was "uniformly . . . interpreted as broadening the potential liability of ski resorts." Brett, 144 N.J. at 495 . | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Consolidated Rail Corporation v. Gottshall
green
1 sentence2020FELA through contract'; and . . . 'abolished the assumption of risk defense.'" Norfolk, 538 U.S. at 145 (quoting Gottshall, 512 U.S. at 542-543 ); see 45 U.S.C. §§ 51-55 . | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Berko v. Freda
green
2 sentences1989Berko, supra 93 N.J. at 88 . 1989Berko, supra 93 N.J. at 88 . | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Marsh v. . Chickering
green
1 sentence1911Marsh v. Chickering, 101 N. Y. 396 , is a leading case on this subject; other cases will be found collected in the case note to Brouseau v. Kellogg S. & S. Co., 27 L. | 1 | 1911–1911 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.