memo for motion against summary judgment :: essays research papers

I.Introduction and Standard for Opposition to Summary JudgmentCrowell Academy, Inc. and Arturo Gomez, (hereinafter, collectively Crowell) were grossly negligent and used wilful misconduct in their responsibilities involving the close in club. The bargaining power of Crowell was so grossly unequal so as to put Lajuana Barnett at the mercy of Crowells negligence. Lastly, the guiltless clause contained in the release form (see release form) is void as against public policy. Consequently, under Maryland law, it is up to the trier of fact to determine if the extenuating clause is unenforceable. As such, in that respect is a dispute as to the genuine issue of material fact related to Crowells Answer, Crowell can be credible to Lajauna Barnett for negligence, and Crowell is not entitled to Summary Judgment as a matter of law. Summary Judgment should be granted only upon a showing that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact. Firemans Fund Ins. Co. v. Rairigh, 59 Md. App. 30 5, 313, cert. denied, 301 Md. 176 (1984). If there is a conflict between the inferences which whitethorn be drawn from the evidence before the court, summary judgment is not proper. Boucher v. Riner, 68 Md. App. 539, 543 (1986) (quoting Coffey v. Derby Steel Co., 291 Md. 241, 246-247 (1981)). Unless the facts are so clear as to sanction a conclusion as a matter of law, it is for the trier of fact to determine whether a defendants negligent conduct amounts to gross negligence. Jacob v. Davis, 128 Md.App. 433, 465 (1999) (quoting Artis v. Cyphers, century Md.App. 633, 652 (1994)). Generally, exculpatory agreements otherwise valid are not construed to cover the more extreme forms of negligence-wilful, wanton, reckless, or gross. Winterstein v. Wilcom, 16 Md.App. 130, 136 (1972).II. Statement of Undisputed Material Facts1.Defendant Arturo Gomez is the fencing coach at Crowell and at all times relevant to this matter acted as Crowells servant. 2.Crowell provides weapons and electronic s coring devices for club members club members provide their feature prophylactic equipment, including mask, glove, jacket, and plastron.3.In the fencing Club meeting prior to October 16, 2001, Gomez instructed team members in footwork preparatory to allowing them to handle weapons4.In the October 16, 2001 club meeting, Gomez instructed club members to don their protective equipment for their initial experience with using their weapons.5. complainants nerve was severed under her left arm when an epee sliced through plaintiffs jacket. 6.Plaintiff had put the plastron on her right arm.