Q: Does the Veterinarian Rule (assumption of risk) apply when a Vet agrees to come to private property to treat a horse?
This happened at a private property in Joshua Tree, California (zoned for equines). Made an appointment with an Equine Vet to come to private property to treat a horse's leg wound. The Vet arrived & began assessing the horse to treat the wound. The Vet wanted to inject a sedative & the Owner told Vet to be careful because the horse didn't like needles. The Vet stated it wasn't a problem because she handles bigger horses all the time. Upon treating the horse, he kicked & fractured the Vet's jaw. The Vet is now threatening to sue the Owner for Medical expenses and Pain & Suffering.
A: In California, the "primary assumption of risk" doctrine often applies to situations where professionals are engaged in inherently risky activities. Under this doctrine, individuals are generally deemed to assume the inherent risks of their profession. In the context of a veterinarian treating a horse, one could argue that the risk of getting kicked by the animal is an inherent risk of the job. However, if the horse owner's negligence increased the risk beyond what would be typically inherent in treating the horse, there might be grounds for the veterinarian to claim negligence. The veterinarian's awareness of the specific risk (i.e., the horse's aversion to needles) and her statement downplaying the concern could be construed as an express acknowledgment and acceptance of that risk. Consequently, this may limit or negate her ability to successfully sue for damages. Still, the exact outcome could depend on the specific facts of the case and a court's interpretation of those facts. It would be advisable to gather detailed evidence about the incident and consult with fellow legal professionals on the matter.
Justia Ask a Lawyer is a forum for consumers to get answers to basic legal questions. Any information sent through Justia Ask a Lawyer is not secure and is done so on a non-confidential basis only.
The use of this website to ask questions or receive answers does not create an attorney–client relationship between you and Justia, or between you and any attorney who receives your information or responds to your questions, nor is it intended to create such a relationship. Additionally, no responses on this forum constitute legal advice, which must be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case. You should not act upon information provided in Justia Ask a Lawyer without seeking professional counsel from an attorney admitted or authorized to practice in your jurisdiction. Justia assumes no responsibility to any person who relies on information contained on or received through this site and disclaims all liability in respect to such information.
Justia cannot guarantee that the information on this website (including any legal information provided by an attorney through this service) is accurate, complete, or up-to-date. While we intend to make every attempt to keep the information on this site current, the owners of and contributors to this site make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to from this site.
