Is this verbiage even legally binding?

[10068]

Seems a bit suspect to me:  "If you die, even if it's our fault, legally it won't be our fault"
 
 
"I KNOWINGLY AND VOLUNTARILY ASSUME ALL RISK OF PROPERTY LOSS, PERSONAL INJURY, SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH, WHICH MAY OCCUR BY ATTENDING [event name] AND HEREBY FOREVER RELEASE, DISCHARGE AND HOLD [organization name] HARMLESS FROM ANY CLAIM ARISING FROM SUCH RISK, EVEN IF ARISING FROM THE NEGLIGENCE OF [organization name], ITS OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, CONTRACTORS, AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES, OR BY THIRD PARTIES, AND I ASSUME FULL RESPONSIBILITY AND LIABILITY FOR MY PARTICIPATION."

 

[Uncle Erik]

Nothing is binding.

Language like that is often used to attempt to convince people not to sue.

There are certain rights that cannot be waived no matter what you sign and juries have a way of looking past language like that. It would take a very long time and a lot of research to find out what holds up and in what jurisdictions. Things can be interpreted differently whether they fall under state or federal jurisdiction. Determining the difference between the two is a can of worms in itself.

 

[10068]

So the short answer is "maybe" 

 

[vcoheda]

what is that taken from?

 

[10068]

Burning Man 2010

 

[Uncle Erik]

So the short answer is "maybe" 

The answer is almost always maybe.

 

[Grelkman]

It's somewhat common language used by organizations sponsoring events and wishing to avoid liability.  But that doesn't make it acceptable.  Why should you bear the risk if the other party fails to exercise the appropriate standard of care?   See what kind of response you get if you request the other party to waive their rights when you are negligent! 

 

[LFF]

Quote:

Quote:

So the short answer is "maybe" 

The answer is almost always maybe.

Except on a law school exam.