The Boy Scouts of America are not liable because they owed no duty, they did not own the camp. Negligence requires a duty, and no duty exists if you are not the owners, manager, supervisor or someone who is liable.Posted: April 14, 2014 Filed under: New York, Summer Camp | Tags: Boy Scout, Boy Scouts of America, BSA, Northern New Jersey Council, Path, Scout, Scout Leader, Scout Troop, Showers, United Methodist Church 4 Comments
The BSA was dismissed because the plaintiff was unable to prove the BSA supervised, owned or managed the camp where he was injured. The BSA had no custody or control of the camp. The plaintiff also failed to argue that a rule, policy, regulation or procedure of the camp had been violated.
Gomes v. Boy Scouts of America, et al., 2013 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 4622; 2013 NY Slip Op 32453(U)
Date of the Decision: October 9, 2013
Plaintiff: Davide E. Gomes
Defendant: Boy Scouts of America, et al.,
Plaintiff Claims: failure to keep the area safe, in good repair, well-lit and free from obstruction or defect and supervise him and the other scouts
Holding: For the defendant Boy Scouts of America
The plaintiff, a 13-year-old Boy Scout fell leaving the shower area at a BSA council camp. He sustained injuries and sued the Boy Scouts of America and other parties.
The Boy Scouts of America moved for a dismissal claiming they were not the owners, in control of, or supervisors of the camp. The camp was owned by the Northern New Jersey Council, BSA. The Northern New Jersey Council is a separate legal entity from the Boy Scouts of America.
There was disputed testimony, whether the plaintiff was running (from witnesses) or walking along the path where he fell. It was lit inside the shower area but not lit outside. The plaintiff had a headlamp with him. During discovery, the plaintiff admitted he did not remember what happened that caused him to fall.
The BSA moved for summary judgment, which was granted by the trial court leading to this appeal.
Summary of the case
The arguments in the case are simple. Did the Boy Scouts of America own, manage, supervise or run the camp or was the camp owned by a third party. The court referred to the legal phrase, did the BSA have “custody and control” of the camp. A Boy Scout Council is a separate and distinct entity from the Boy Scouts of America. The Boy Scouts of America grants a charter (sort of like a license) to promote and use the Boy Scout program to the youth in the council’s geographic area. Boy Scout councils own camps like this one where the plaintiff was injured. The title on the deed is Northern New Jersey Council, Boy Scouts of America, not Boy Scouts of America.
The court looked at several other cases, which found the same way.
…BSA not liable for alleged negligence of charter BSA Council as there was no agency relationship between it and Council, and it lacked requisite supervision, direction, or control over adult leader who had custody of Scouts during trip at issue….
…where plaintiff died while on Scout trip, BSA granted summary judgment as it exercised no supervisory control over troop or adult leaders who accompanied scouts on trip….
The court also quoted a decision where a Council was not liable for the acts of a volunteer because the Council did not have control over the Scoutmaster. “…absent evidence that Council had supervision or control over day-to-day activities of Scout troop or scoutmaster, it could not be held liable for scoutmaster’s alleged negligent supervision…”
What caught my eye in this decision was this statement by the court.
Here, there is no issue of very young campers being unsupervised or placed in risky circumstances as plaintiff and his fellow scouts were all teenagers and there is no evidence that any camp policy was violated or that BSA had any control over the camp’s operation.
Here the court might have ruled differently if it had found that the policy of the camp had been violated.
So Now What?
The first issue is agency or ownership. The Boy Scouts of America were not liable to the camper because the BSA did not own, supervise or manage the particular piece of property where the scout was hurt. You can’t sue someone for negligence, unless they owed a duty to you. If you don’t own, manager or supervise the place where the plaintiff was injured you can’t be negligent because you owe no duty to that person.
Of greater interest is the fact the camp had no policies that were violated, which lead to the injury of the plaintiff. As a camp director of a BSA, GSA or any other camp or operation, you need to understand that the rules, regulations, policies and procedures that you write for your camp are going to be used as the rule, the standard, against which you will be judged at trial.
Don’t write rules, policies, regulations, or policies you can’t live up to.
What do you think? Leave a comment.
If you like this let your friends know or post it on FaceBook, Twitter or LinkedIn
Copyright 2014 Recreation Law (720) Edit Law
Facebook Page: Outdoor Recreation & Adventure Travel Law
Mobile Site: http://m.recreation-law.com
By Recreation Law Recfirstname.lastname@example.org James H. Moss #Authorrank
<rel=”author” link=” https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/112453188060350225356/” />
#AdventureTourism, #AdventureTravelLaw, #AdventureTravelLawyer, #AttorneyatLaw, #Backpacking, #BicyclingLaw, #Camps, #ChallengeCourse, #ChallengeCourseLaw, #ChallengeCourseLawyer, #CyclingLaw, #FitnessLaw, #FitnessLawyer, #Hiking, #HumanPowered, #HumanPoweredRecreation, #IceClimbing, #JamesHMoss, #JimMoss, #Law, #Mountaineering, #Negligence, #OutdoorLaw, #OutdoorRecreationLaw, #OutsideLaw, #OutsideLawyer, #RecLaw, #Rec-Law, #RecLawBlog, #Rec-LawBlog, #RecLawyer, #RecreationalLawyer, #RecreationLaw, #RecreationLawBlog, #RecreationLawcom, #Recreation-Lawcom, #Recreation-Law.com, #RiskManagement, #RockClimbing, #RockClimbingLawyer, #RopesCourse, #RopesCourseLawyer, #SkiAreas, #Skiing, #SkiLaw, #Snowboarding, #SummerCamp, #Tourism, #TravelLaw, #YouthCamps, #ZipLineLawyer, BSA, Boy Scouts of America, Northern New Jersey Council, Showers, Path,
I think that there is some fault by the Boy Scout leaders. They need to keep a close eye on them cause there responsible for the children. On the other had it is the job of the facility to be safe. To eliminate hazards of any kind. Yes the are camping, but if you have a child who is blind it would not be safe for them ether. You have to make sure everything is good for everyone even if it’s dark or alone. The facility will want to make improvement.
“It is the job of the facility to be safe?” How is anything safe? Your bathroom is the most dangerous place you visit. Driving is the most dangerous thing you do, both are 100% your responsibility yet they are not safe. You fail. How can you eliminate hazards of any kind? which trees are going to fall down in the wind? Which mice are going to come into your tent or cabin? What storm will create problems and which ones will create rainbows.
I believe the plaintiff did not come prepared when suing the Boy Scouts of America. If they did not focus on the property being the cause and focused more on the lack of supervision and breach of camp policies, they could have won the case. I believe that the plaintiff should have been compensated for the injuries but in the court of law, you have to be prepared to back up your accusations. The Boy Scouts of America were extremely prepared and were able to be dismissed from the case.
So the BSA was liable for the plaintiff not being able to walk down a path. It was a camping trip. That means no lights, bring your own flashlight or headlamp. What supervision is needed to have a kid walk down a trail at night. If the plaintiff was running, how do you supervise a kid running.
You can’t be every were all the time watching kids and the courts recognize that.
You are walking out of class and fall down. Is the college liable for your injury because you were not paying attention?