Question

During a professional hockey game, Derek, a player for the Devils, collides with Alexei, a player for the Bruins, and falls, hitting his head hard against the ice. Dazed, Derek tells his coach that he thinks he might have a concussion. The coach orders him to “man up” and get back in the game. Derek suffers a second collision with Alexei and is removed from the game unconscious. He is later diagnosed with a brain injury.

Has a tort been committed? If so, what is it, and who committed it? What is this party’s best defense?

The tort that has most likely been committed is ____?

The elements are (1) a duty of care, (2) a breach of the duty, and (3)

the breach’s causation of (4) an injury.

The coach has a duty to exercise ____ care within the context of the game?

Ordering a player with a possible

concussion to “man up” is likely not an exercise of reasonable care

This breach leads to further injuries to Derek. The coach’s best defense is _____?

This breach leads to further injuries to Derek. The coach’s best defense is _____ ?

. A party who voluntarily enters into a situation—such as a hockey

game—knowing the risk involved cannot recover if he or she suffers an injury as a consequence. The requirements are knowledge of the risk and a voluntary assumption of it. As a player of the game, Derek most likely meets both requirements.

Answer 1

The tort that has most likely been committed is ____?

Answer= The tor that was committed in the give case was negligence.

The elements are (1) a duty of care, (2) a breach of the duty, and (3) the breach’s causation of (4) an injury. The coach has a duty to exercise ____ care within the context of the game?

Answer= Duty of care as the coach needed to provide proper medical attention to the player.

Ordering a player with a possible concussion to “man up” is likely not an exercise of reasonable care. This breach leads to further injuries to Derek. The coach’s best defense is _____ ?

Answer=  contributory negligence on the part of the player. The coach can provide the defense by stating that the player was also negligent when he was playing the game that caused him the injury at the same time, there was always a chance of having an injury while playing the games such as ice hockey