NASCAR fans throughout the nation, including the Meridian area, were likely excited to tune in to one of the sport's biggest races of the year which took place this past weekend. While the Daytona 500 was the main event of last weekend there are other events surrounding that race that draw many to the area. One of those events was a second-tier race that took place at the Daytona International Speedway, the evening before.
Unfortunately that race took a turn for the worse when an accident on the track sent parts of the vehicles involved flying into the stands. At least 30 spectators were hurt in the unexpected incident, suffering injuries including swelling of the abdomen and broken bones. Perhaps not surprisingly, some of those individuals are looking into pursing legal action against NASCAR, which owns the track, via a personal injury lawsuit.
The theory behind the action would likely be gross negligence. More specifically, that the fence separating the spectator stands from the racetrack was not safe enough. In the area where the crash occurred, there were apparently holes in that fence.
Not everyone believes that such a case would be easy to achieve a positive result in. This is because of the liability waivers that are standard on tickets for many sporting events. Some view it as a contract under which the spectator assumes risk for any injuries that could be suffered at the event.
One attorney, who apparently has a couple of clients who were victims of the crash, does not believe that the waiver would ultimately hold up however. He indicated that while it is possible that someone could be injured at a car race, most would not expect the injury would be due to a heavy piece of car flying into the stands. He appears hopeful that in an effort to appease its fans, NASCAR will settle with the injured parties without a trial.
What are y our thoughts on this matter? Do you believe that spectators of such events should assume the risk for any injuries that could occur?
Source: USA Today, "Fans injured at NASCAR race explore legal options," Feb. 26, 2013