Danny Kim case update

[Enchanter]

^^^ Are you saying that the track has zero percent responsibility for ‘safety’ once the vehicle leaves the track surface?

If you went off track, lost traction and fell over in the ‘run-off’ or ‘gravel-trap’ and broke your wrist, would the track bare some responsibility?

If you went off track, lost traction and fell over in the ‘run-off’ or ‘gravel-trap’ and broke your wrist, and was impaled by some re-bar that was just below the surface of the gravel, would the track bare some responsibility?

The providers case was likely thrown out because they weren’t responsible for the ‘safety’ of the track (by track I also mean the surrounding areas). That was the responsibility of Laguna Seca.

 

[Saxon]

Though we all sign waivers, we should expect some reasonable care on the part of the provider or the facility.

For example, oil will be cleaned up and debris cleared to the best of their ability. That there will be a flag men/women at the usual corners.

That riders who consistently break rules will pulled from the track.

That when I go off on the run off part of the track, there is not a giant construction hole that someone did not cover.

For the most part, I have had good experiences, but one time, a teaching school combined the Sears Point paddock exit and entry. In other words, after your session, you were ordered to come back to the paddock via the same route that riders were leaving the paddock from. It did result in two bikes colliding. A reasonable and foreseeable event.

 

[motomania2007]

This case hinges on "was it reasonable for the track personnel to leave a sandbag in a dedicated runoff area that is specifically designed and provided so that when a rider makes a mistake and leaves the paved surface, the rider still has the opportunity to use the dedicated runoff area to come to a safe stop."

What is reasonable or not, is a question for the jury to decide.

This is why we have lawsuits instead of dueling pistols at dawn and similar, less peaceful, methods of settling our differences of opinion on a situation.

Someone mentioned the issue of waiver. Legally, a waiver is only sufficient in waiving liability for the risks the signer of the waiver anticipates.

Does the waiver cover typical crash on the track? I think it is reasonable to say it should.

Does the waiver cover getting hit by another bike and crashing? Again, I think it is reasonable say it should.

There is a very good argument that trackday riders riding on a track with GP levels of safety runoff... very reasonable to expect that runoff is safe to use and would NOT be obstructed and therefore it is unreasonable for a waiver waive liability for the track having misrepresented the availability of the runoff areas.

The last 30 years of Laguna Seca safety improvements will show the track clearly knew the function and maintenance requirements of the runoff areas.

And how those safety improvements are a significant portion of why a trackday rider chose to PAY to ride at Laguna Seca.

The first time I rode Laguna Seca in 1984, there was no runoff in many of the corners. There was a wall on the outer edge of turn 11, there was a gully of the outside of the corner a couple of corners earlier and turn 2 outside was a chain link fence and Armco.

It scared the crap out of me.

The track was completely different in those aspects and many more when I last rode Laguna in about 2010ish.

While my personal opinion of Daniel Kim is not very high that doesn't mean he doesn't have a good claim because the runoff area was not properly maintained.

 

[gixxerjeff]

While my personal opinion of Daniel Kim is not very high that doesn't mean he doesn't have a good claim because the runoff area was not properly maintained.

^^^
This sums thing up nicely for me. I find myself hovering between agreeing with the solid "shades of gray" arguments and saying "fuck this guy". I suppose you can put me solidly in both camps.
The scenario provides me haunting memories of how Wayne Rainey was injured in Italy. It wasn't the runoff that hurt him, it was how it had been prepared. Conventional thinking at the time was to create "waves" in the gravel to slow a vehicles momentum. While this had been proven to be effective in making things safer for cars it turned out to be just the opposite for motorcycles. The "waves'' sent his motorcycle into a violent bucking motion that contributed to the severity of his injury. What was learned as a result of that incident was of no help to poor Wayne but did make things safer for riders in the future.
I guess that's what can be hoped for in this case.

 

[stangmx13]

from the way you are talking, it sounds like you'd like to see this guy win his lawsuit and then we get to see Laguna get shut down completely. That's what happens in these cases. Some goof ball can't figure out how to ride, gets hurt and blames someone else instead of taking their own responsibility. Shit, the first time I rode Buttonwillow, I almost ran off the track. Was I supposed to blame the provider?

I would be very surprised if the most expensive track in CA didn't have any way to cover the cost of this lawsuit and any damages if they lose. We aren't talking about Chuck or BW here. I have more faith in Laguna that they can survive a single injury lawsuit. This probably isn't their first after all.

If you ran off track and the track (not provider) implemented something out of the ordinary that caused you to get severely injured, I suspect you would consider suing. Maybe your limit isn't "a sandbag", maybe its more like they "parked a truck in the runoff". Everyone has a limit and I don't believe anyone that says "I'd never sue".

The rider's skill seems irrelevant here because the track made the "mistake", by implementing something unexpected in the gravel trap. From what I remember of the incident, the rider did nothing unexpected by running off track where they did - no matter their skill level. "Unexpected" is the key word. When I go to Chuck, I expect sandy mostly flat runoff , except for those few spots. When I go to BW, I expect small bushes and potholes in the dirt. When I go to Autoclub, I expect asphalt, grass, cones, and/or air fence. When I go to Laguna, I expect decomposed granite of varying depths and walls maybe with air fence. No sandbags. But of course, the trial could find that Laguna didn't make a mistake with the sandbag and they could continue to use them in a similar way.

 

[sidewazzz]

Wonder if anyone here actually knows the actual details.... the turn and where the sand bags were.

I've seen sandbags trackside never seen them on track but I've seen them in places that I would imagine are there to reroute water and debris from flowing onto the track

 

[stangmx13]

IIRC the sandbag was in the runoff between T5 and T6 and it was there to stop water/sand getting onto the track because it had rained prior to that day.

 

[Enchanter]

Wonder if anyone here actually knows the actual details.... the turn and where the sand bags were.

I've seen sandbags trackside never seen them on track but I've seen them in places that I would imagine are there to reroute water and debris from flowing onto the track

There is a thread (and video) on BARF. I’m looking for it now.

He rode off the exit of T5, kept it upright thru the dirt gravel, hit the sandbag and crashed. The bike landed on him and he severely broke a leg.

EDIT:

[YOUTUBE]DsnDOOk33RY[/YOUTUBE]

 

[sidewazzz]

IIRC the sandbag was in the runoff between T5 and T6 and it was there to stop water/sand getting onto the track because it had rained prior to that day.

The run uphill from 5 to 6 is straight.... so now I'm confused

Update: after watching the video

This is exactly what I imagined before once in-between 5 & 6 was mentioned.


GTFO here with the Laguna SCAMP or Laguna negligence. lol


guy is out of control and in the process of crashing by just leaving the track in that fashion.... Shoot he's out of his league just watching him run up into 5 then to OVER ACCELERATE coming out LOL wouldn't be surprised if this was B group. I'd argue he even target fixated on the bags when he could have made that corner. But GTFO here with that... I'm seriously laughing that some of you actually think this is worthy enough to stand up for.

 

[tzrider]

The run uphill from 5 to 6 is straight.... so now I'm confused

The crash was in the runoff at the exit of 5, which I guess one could say is between 5 & 6.

One question I hope gets considered is, given the time of year and recent weather, was it more reasonable for the sandbags to be there than not to be?

Also, if the sandbags were mentioned at the morning safety briefing (which Kim didn't attend), is that a factor? I don't know whether the sandbags were mentioned in any case.

 

[squidworth]

Looks like targe fixation on the bags he hit. Maybe he should sue the manufacturer of the bags themselves. Because if they did not exist, the bags would not have been there. Also, might as well throw in a suit on the earth itself. How dare the earth have dirt that reduced his level of traction

 

[sidewazzz]

Looks like targe fixation on the bags he hit. Maybe he should sue the manufacturer of the bags themselves. Because if they did not exist, the bags would not have been there. Also, might as well throw in a suit on the earth itself. How dare the earth have dirt that reduced his level of traction

Maybe the bike manufacture too for landing on him

 

[squidworth]

And gravity... damn that gravity...

 

[stangmx13]

The run uphill from 5 to 6 is straight.... so now I'm confused

Update: after watching the video

This is exactly what I imagined before once in-between 5 & 6 was mentioned.

GTFO here with the Laguna SCAMP or Laguna negligence. lol

guy is out of control and in the process of crashing by just leaving the track in that fashion.... Shoot he's out of his league just watching him run up into 5 then to OVER ACCELERATE coming out LOL wouldn't be surprised if this was B group. I'd argue he even target fixated on the bags when he could have made that corner. But GTFO here with that... I'm seriously laughing that some of you actually think this is worthy enough to stand up for.

You are ok with sandbags in an impact zone? If the track told you about the sandbags before signing up, would you still pay and attend?

 

[tzrider]

You are ok with sandbags in an impact zone? If the track told you about the sandbags before signing up, would you still pay and attend?

Given the alternative if they weren't there, yes. If you do a winter track day at Laguna on a rainy year, you can expect some adverse conditions.

 

[stangmx13]

The crash was in the runoff at the exit of 5, which I guess one could say is between 5 & 6.

One question I hope gets considered is, given the time of year and recent weather, was it more reasonable for the sandbags to be there than not to be?

Also, if the sandbags were mentioned at the morning safety briefing (which Kim didn't attend), is that a factor? I don't know whether the sandbags were mentioned in any case.

I definitely think both of these points will come up in court.

IMO
- It is more reasonable for the sandbags to be there given that not having them would make the track less safe with potential sand/dirt on the asphalt.
- There's very little issue with the sandbags IF riders were informed and allowed to decide on what amount of risk they are comfortable with before riding. They also should have been offered a refund or credit if the risk was not acceptable.
- If riders were not informed, the track was not safe enough as-is to run a trackday. The lack of enough safety is supported by this incident.
- I think the case against the track would have been tossed if the riders were informed of the sandbags at the riders meeting. I suspect even the TDP didn't know they were there either. All of that should have come out in depositions.

 

[budman]

Every time I see that vid I yell turn the damn bike..!!

His lean angle was worthy of a standard street corner at a mediumish pace.

 

[Enchanter]

Every time I see that vid I yell turn the damn bike..!!

His lean angle was worthy of a standard street corner at a mediumish pace.

Yup. It appeared to me that he attempted to tighten the turn by hanging off more. Had he just counter-steered, I think he would have remained on the paved portion of the track.

 

[sidewazzz]

You are ok with sandbags in an impact zone? If the track told you about the sandbags before signing up, would you still pay and attend?

sandbags in the impact zone?!?!?! dude the sandbags were literally on the straightest part of the track and in the dirt


would sandbags keep me from signing up if I knew about them I guess if they were in the middle of the track then ya. but being they were in the dirt off the track not a chance. Thill had a wall 5 feet off the track at turn 13

laguna t1 was a death trap... still is



Reckless riders in my group would be more reason for me to not attend not sandbags that are off the track. And trust me there have been people i refuse to ride side by side with based on their ability and recklessness.

This wasn't rebar just randomly sticking out the ground, wasn't a random sandbag that fell out the back of the truck in the impact zone. its 1 of 5 rows of sands bags used to divert water from going onto the track that also happens to be the straightest part of the track.

As Mr Stoner would say Mr Kim's ambitions out weighed his talent. He literally ran off the track on 1 or two straights on the entire track. He did it while accelerating out the corner going uphill... no power slide, no obvious rear slip... just plain old too much wrist and then probably target fixation. The one thing he did do right was not grab a handful of front brake the second he went for a off track detour.

 

[stangmx13]

sandbags in the impact zone?!?!?! dude the sandbags were literally on the straightest part of the track and in the dirt

Nah. He left the track right where the exit curb started. That's definitely an impact zone, its definitely a place where a rider that crashes mid-corner can end up.

It'd be stupid for someone to stand or leave a bike where the sandbags are... cuz its an impact zone.