HORSE SHOW PARTICIPANT FAILS TO PROVEWILLFUL
AND WANTON CONDUCT BY HORSE SHOW SPONSOR

Illinois Equine Activity Liability Act Put to the Test Again
by Teresa Vamos

Recently, on November 23, 1999, the Illinois Appellate Court, Fourth District, issued the second reported court decision in Illinois interpreting the Illinois Equine Activity Liability Act (745 ILCS 47/1 et seq.), which became effective on July 7, 1995.  The case is Lessman v. Rhodes, No. 4-99-0262 (Ill. App. 11/23/99) (4th District).

In April of 1996, Dean Lessman, participated in a horse show which was sponsored by Trail Riders Association, Inc. [Trail Riders] in Moweaqua, Illinois.  While Lessman was warming up his mare in the arena, another show participant was riding a two year old stallion in the arena, which kicked Lessman above his left ankle, breaking his tibia and fibula.

Lessman sued Trail Riders alleging negligent and willful and wanton conduct.  Lessman also sued the rider of the stallion, Dave Parks, and the owner of the stallion, James Rhodes.

In Lessman’s complaint against the defendants, he alleged that approximately 15 minutes prior to the occurrence, Parks’ stallion had attempted to kick another horse, attempted to mount another horse, and was generally being difficult to handle.  Lessman alleged he was unaware of the stallion’s dangerous behavior and was riding past Park’s stallion when the stallion kicked, hitting his leg.

All of the defendants to Lessman’s action filed motions to dismiss the case in their favor based on the Illinois Equine Activity Liability Act, which they argued only allowed recovery for willful and wanton acts.
The Trial Court dismissed all counts in favor of the defendants, except the willful and wanton action against Trail Riders. The plaintiff, Lessman, alleged Trail Riders was willful and wanton for "(1) not checking into the background of the horses registered for the show; (2) not monitoring the behavior of the horses; (3) not requiring stallions to be shown at separate times and in separate classes from other horses; (4) allowing all horses to be prepared and shown at the same time; and (5) not requiring red ribbons to be placed on the tail of horses that were "kickers" as was the social rule among horse shows".

Trail Riders eventually moved for the lawsuit to be dismissed in its favor because Lessman failed to prove his allegations that Trail Riders engaged in intentional or reckless conduct. The Trial Court ruled in
favor of Trail Riders, and Lessman appealed the Trial Court decision to the Illinois Appellate Court.

The Appellate Court reviewed the purpose of the Illinois Equine Activity Liability Act, which is set forth in Section 5 of the Act "The General Assembly recognizes that persons who participate in equine activities
may incur injuries as a result of the risks involved in those activities…Therefore, it is the intent of the General Assembly to encourage equine activities by delineating the responsibilities of those involved in equine activities".

The Appellate Court also reviewed Section 15 of the Act, which states that "It is recognized that equine activities are hazardous to participants, regardless of all feasible safety measures that can be
taken. Each participant who engages in an equine activity expressly assumes the risk of and legal responsibility for injury, loss, or damage to the participant or the participant’s property that results from participating in an equine activity, except in specific situations as set forth in Section 20 [of the Act], when the equine activity sponsor or equine professional may be held responsible….".

The Appellate Court noted that Section 20 of the Act provides an exception to the general rule of immunity and permits liability for an equine activity sponsor that commits an "act or omission that constitutes willful or wanton disregard for the safety of the participant, and that act or omission caused the injury." Section 20 (b) (4).

The Illinois Appellate Court looked to the Illinois Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act and the Illinois Civil Pattern Jury Instructions for the definition of "willful and wanton conduct".

In the Tort Immunity Act, "willful and wanton conduct" is defined as "a course of action which shows an actual or deliberate intention to cause harm or which, if not intentional, shows an utter indifference to or conscious disregard for the safety of others or their property."  745 ILCS 10/1-210.  The Illinois Pattern Jury Instructions, Civil, defines "willful and wanton conduct" as behavior "which, if not intentional, shows an utter indifference to or conscious disregard for the safety of others."  Illinois Pattern Jury Instructions, Civil, No.
14.01 (3d ed. 1995).

The Appellate Court concluded that the Trial Court had properly awarded summary judgment in favor of Trail  Riders because Lessman was unable to prove that Trail Riders’ conduct had risen to the level of willful and wanton conduct.  The Court found that Trail Riders had not done anything differently than any other horse show sponsor would have done. Lessman presented no evidence at the Trial Court level that any equine activity sponsor, within the state of Illinois or any other state, had rules which required a horse show sponsor to conduct background checks into horses, separate or exclude stallions from participating in shows, or require "kickers" to wear ribbons on their tails at the time of Lessman’s accident.

The Appellate Court found from the Trial Court’s record that Lessman had conceded that he was unaware of any such rules at the 10-15 horse shows he had attended. The Appellate Court also found that defendant, Park, and the President of Trail Riders, had no knowledge of such rules existing at any of the horse shows they had attended. Thus, the Appellate Court found the "lack of a customary practice of separating or excluding stallions to be a good indication Trail Riders did not act recklessly or with conscious disregard to Lessman’s safety".

The Appellate Court commented that their "holding is consistent with the intent of the Act. The very purpose of the Act is to encourage equine activities by protecting equine activity sponsors from excess liability due to horse-related injuries.  The legislature recognized the hazardous and unpredictable nature of riding and showing horses and sought to shift the risk from sponsors to participants except for intentional or reckless behavior. We find Trail Riders did not act recklessly and Lessman’s injury was the type of injury that the legislature contemplated when it placed the assumption of the risk upon participants."

Teresa Vamos is an attorney in private practice in Chicago, Illinois. She has been a horse enthusiast and owner for many years.  The focus of her Equine Law practice is to provide comprehensive and affordable legal services to horse owners and equine related organizations.