Statement from Rich Taylor (LACR Lawsuit)

Tortuga
Posts
52
Joined
5/6/2024
Location
west coast, CA, USA
1/22/2025 8:10am

Obviously Taylor's lawsuit didn't help matters, but it was also 7 years ago. Unfortunately LACR is fighting a new lawsuit (Jan 2024) where it appears a mother is suing because her son was injured at a practice day. Look it up on Google, easy to find.

10
TAUTOG
Posts
1707
Joined
1/27/2023
Location
Mohrsville, PA, USA
1/22/2025 8:14am
Rab wrote:

#boycottxbrand 

It sucks to see the advertisements on vital or any moto website. Surly this website wouldn't close if they refused 1 brands money.

Don't bite the hand that feeds you, don't shit where you eat EKS, etc

16
1
1/22/2025 8:18am
Tortuga wrote:
Obviously Taylor's lawsuit didn't help matters, but it was also 7 years ago. Unfortunately LACR is fighting a new lawsuit (Jan 2024) where it appears a...

Obviously Taylor's lawsuit didn't help matters, but it was also 7 years ago. Unfortunately LACR is fighting a new lawsuit (Jan 2024) where it appears a mother is suing because her son was injured at a practice day. Look it up on Google, easy to find.

I bet that kid's parents don't make a living in the powersports business.

13

The Shop

Tortuga
Posts
52
Joined
5/6/2024
Location
west coast, CA, USA
1/22/2025 8:27am

I bet that kid's parents don't make a living in the powersports business.

You're probably right. Not at all condoning what the Taylors did, just pointing out that LACR is battling others doing the same. Being that this last case is very recent, it wouldn't surprise me that it's the reason for the shutdown, not a case from 7 years ago. 

1
Trickamoto
Posts
668
Joined
2/6/2018
Location
Beverly Hills, CA, USA
1/22/2025 8:29am

Does Rich still show his face in the mx community? Like at a Sx or whatever?

5
GrapeApe
Posts
8931
Joined
6/7/2010
Location
Mc Kinney, TX, USA
1/22/2025 8:33am
Tortuga wrote:
Obviously Taylor's lawsuit didn't help matters, but it was also 7 years ago. Unfortunately LACR is fighting a new lawsuit (Jan 2024) where it appears a...

Obviously Taylor's lawsuit didn't help matters, but it was also 7 years ago. Unfortunately LACR is fighting a new lawsuit (Jan 2024) where it appears a mother is suing because her son was injured at a practice day. Look it up on Google, easy to find.

That one should get the attention of all of the adults that are forced to ride their 450s on the same track and at the same time as kids on 50s. She sued not only the track and track crew but the rider that landed on her son under the theory he shouldn't have been going so fast to allow his tires to leave the ground when there are 6 year old kids on the track.

10
1/22/2025 8:37am
Tortuga wrote:
Obviously Taylor's lawsuit didn't help matters, but it was also 7 years ago. Unfortunately LACR is fighting a new lawsuit (Jan 2024) where it appears a...

Obviously Taylor's lawsuit didn't help matters, but it was also 7 years ago. Unfortunately LACR is fighting a new lawsuit (Jan 2024) where it appears a mother is suing because her son was injured at a practice day. Look it up on Google, easy to find.

Just read through that complaint/petition. The outcome of that one is going to be interesting. 

mxxcdez
Posts
60
Joined
6/4/2024
Location
socal, CA, USA
1/22/2025 8:46am

It's baffling that LACR (or any other track) is not held responsible for anything; everyone disregards egregious or overlooked errors in track design, lack of maintenance and precautions, staff/facilities mismanagement, and policing of idiot pit bike/UTV riders/golf kart drivers. Tracks and their management are not above negligence or ignorance.

Tracks that do a good job of managing their facility and ridership get a thumbs up, and plenty of them do it right. There are a few tracks and operators that do a piss-poor job of controlling and maintaining their venue and ridership. It's time to tighten up operations and do better across the board.

1
29
Tortuga
Posts
52
Joined
5/6/2024
Location
west coast, CA, USA
1/22/2025 8:47am
GrapeApe wrote:
That one should get the attention of all of the adults that are forced to ride their 450s on the same track and at the same...

That one should get the attention of all of the adults that are forced to ride their 450s on the same track and at the same time as kids on 50s. She sued not only the track and track crew but the rider that landed on her son under the theory he shouldn't have been going so fast to allow his tires to leave the ground when there are 6 year old kids on the track.

I've ridden LACR a lot through the years. It's one of the best, most well run tracks you'll find. They usually will not allow little 50's, really small kids on the track the same time as adults. 80's, yes. They will usually have a little kid, ladies practice if they get requested or there's an obvious need for one. Anyway, it's a well run professional track. 

8
1/22/2025 8:52am
mxxcdez wrote:
It's baffling that LACR (or any other track) is not held responsible for anything; everyone disregards egregious or overlooked errors in track design, lack of maintenance...

It's baffling that LACR (or any other track) is not held responsible for anything; everyone disregards egregious or overlooked errors in track design, lack of maintenance and precautions, staff/facilities mismanagement, and policing of idiot pit bike/UTV riders/golf kart drivers. Tracks and their management are not above negligence or ignorance.

Tracks that do a good job of managing their facility and ridership get a thumbs up, and plenty of them do it right. There are a few tracks and operators that do a piss-poor job of controlling and maintaining their venue and ridership. It's time to tighten up operations and do better across the board.

Odd posting and post-liking history, you have a dog in this fight, or are you just another Rich Taylor shill?

Tracks should be held liable for negligence, nobody says otherwise, but they should not be held liable for idiots being idiots, and litigious "invincibility complex" people just trying to not take responsibility for their own actions and personal negligence. 

16
mxxcdez
Posts
60
Joined
6/4/2024
Location
socal, CA, USA
1/22/2025 8:59am
mxxcdez wrote:
It's baffling that LACR (or any other track) is not held responsible for anything; everyone disregards egregious or overlooked errors in track design, lack of maintenance...

It's baffling that LACR (or any other track) is not held responsible for anything; everyone disregards egregious or overlooked errors in track design, lack of maintenance and precautions, staff/facilities mismanagement, and policing of idiot pit bike/UTV riders/golf kart drivers. Tracks and their management are not above negligence or ignorance.

Tracks that do a good job of managing their facility and ridership get a thumbs up, and plenty of them do it right. There are a few tracks and operators that do a piss-poor job of controlling and maintaining their venue and ridership. It's time to tighten up operations and do better across the board.

Odd posting and post-liking history, you have a dog in this fight, or are you just another Rich Taylor shill?Tracks should be held liable for negligence...

Odd posting and post-liking history, you have a dog in this fight, or are you just another Rich Taylor shill?

Tracks should be held liable for negligence, nobody says otherwise, but they should not be held liable for idiots being idiots, and litigious "invincibility complex" people just trying to not take responsibility for their own actions and personal negligence. 

Odd to see you and the same others here posting the same shit over and over again. You must be another LACR shill defending their outright slanderous behavior on this topic. Multiple issues and suits tells me they are not always the innocent ones. Everyone needs to own up to their bullshit and they have had options and are only grifting for attention. Let's see what they do with all of the GoFund Me funds and Tshirt sales when their story fizzles. Will they give it all back to the ridership?

26
NSP139
Posts
1277
Joined
5/6/2021
Location
Temecula, CA, USA
1/22/2025 8:59am
Tortuga wrote:
Obviously Taylor's lawsuit didn't help matters, but it was also 7 years ago. Unfortunately LACR is fighting a new lawsuit (Jan 2024) where it appears a...

Obviously Taylor's lawsuit didn't help matters, but it was also 7 years ago. Unfortunately LACR is fighting a new lawsuit (Jan 2024) where it appears a mother is suing because her son was injured at a practice day. Look it up on Google, easy to find.

GrapeApe wrote:
That one should get the attention of all of the adults that are forced to ride their 450s on the same track and at the same...

That one should get the attention of all of the adults that are forced to ride their 450s on the same track and at the same time as kids on 50s. She sued not only the track and track crew but the rider that landed on her son under the theory he shouldn't have been going so fast to allow his tires to leave the ground when there are 6 year old kids on the track.

The CPS should be going after the mom for letting her 6 year old on the track with 450s!

16
1
1/22/2025 9:03am
mxxcdez wrote:
It's baffling that LACR (or any other track) is not held responsible for anything; everyone disregards egregious or overlooked errors in track design, lack of maintenance...

It's baffling that LACR (or any other track) is not held responsible for anything; everyone disregards egregious or overlooked errors in track design, lack of maintenance and precautions, staff/facilities mismanagement, and policing of idiot pit bike/UTV riders/golf kart drivers. Tracks and their management are not above negligence or ignorance.

Tracks that do a good job of managing their facility and ridership get a thumbs up, and plenty of them do it right. There are a few tracks and operators that do a piss-poor job of controlling and maintaining their venue and ridership. It's time to tighten up operations and do better across the board.

Odd posting and post-liking history, you have a dog in this fight, or are you just another Rich Taylor shill?Tracks should be held liable for negligence...

Odd posting and post-liking history, you have a dog in this fight, or are you just another Rich Taylor shill?

Tracks should be held liable for negligence, nobody says otherwise, but they should not be held liable for idiots being idiots, and litigious "invincibility complex" people just trying to not take responsibility for their own actions and personal negligence. 

mxxcdez wrote:
Odd to see you and the same others here posting the same shit over and over again. You must be another LACR shill defending their outright...

Odd to see you and the same others here posting the same shit over and over again. You must be another LACR shill defending their outright slanderous behavior on this topic. Multiple issues and suits tells me they are not always the innocent ones. Everyone needs to own up to their bullshit and they have had options and are only grifting for attention. Let's see what they do with all of the GoFund Me funds and Tshirt sales when their story fizzles. Will they give it all back to the ridership?

Rich, that you?

13
SonofThor32
Posts
870
Joined
5/30/2021
Location
Corryton, TN, USA
1/22/2025 9:11am

Adding here so folks do not have to dig for it:

Motion for Writ in AIMEE DRYSDALE VS. LACR MX| Trellis.Law

Not to make light of what happened, but the verbiage was sometime humorous reading the terms "wiped out" (and a few others).  I also did not realize the top speed of a YZ450 was 80MPH.

4
truck
Posts
3875
Joined
6/10/2015
Location
Louisville, KY, USA
Fantasy
1/22/2025 9:13am
Odd posting and post-liking history, you have a dog in this fight, or are you just another Rich Taylor shill?Tracks should be held liable for negligence...

Odd posting and post-liking history, you have a dog in this fight, or are you just another Rich Taylor shill?

Tracks should be held liable for negligence, nobody says otherwise, but they should not be held liable for idiots being idiots, and litigious "invincibility complex" people just trying to not take responsibility for their own actions and personal negligence. 

mxxcdez wrote:
Odd to see you and the same others here posting the same shit over and over again. You must be another LACR shill defending their outright...

Odd to see you and the same others here posting the same shit over and over again. You must be another LACR shill defending their outright slanderous behavior on this topic. Multiple issues and suits tells me they are not always the innocent ones. Everyone needs to own up to their bullshit and they have had options and are only grifting for attention. Let's see what they do with all of the GoFund Me funds and Tshirt sales when their story fizzles. Will they give it all back to the ridership?

Rich, that you?

Zero chance this guy isn't Rich or Rich adjacent. I do appreciate that he's too stupid to keep his mouth shut every time this topic gets bumped so it stays up here longer than it otherwise would.

13
1
mxxcdez
Posts
60
Joined
6/4/2024
Location
socal, CA, USA
1/22/2025 9:16am
mxxcdez wrote:
Odd to see you and the same others here posting the same shit over and over again. You must be another LACR shill defending their outright...

Odd to see you and the same others here posting the same shit over and over again. You must be another LACR shill defending their outright slanderous behavior on this topic. Multiple issues and suits tells me they are not always the innocent ones. Everyone needs to own up to their bullshit and they have had options and are only grifting for attention. Let's see what they do with all of the GoFund Me funds and Tshirt sales when their story fizzles. Will they give it all back to the ridership?

Rich, that you?

truck wrote:
Zero chance this guy isn't Rich or Rich adjacent. I do appreciate that he's too stupid to keep his mouth shut every time this topic gets...

Zero chance this guy isn't Rich or Rich adjacent. I do appreciate that he's too stupid to keep his mouth shut every time this topic gets bumped so it stays up here longer than it otherwise would.

Zero chance you and the same dozen people would post here again. "I do appreciate that he's too stupid to keep his mouth shut every time this topic gets bumped so it stays up here longer than it otherwise would."

1
21
truck
Posts
3875
Joined
6/10/2015
Location
Louisville, KY, USA
Fantasy
1/22/2025 9:30am

Rich, that you?

truck wrote:
Zero chance this guy isn't Rich or Rich adjacent. I do appreciate that he's too stupid to keep his mouth shut every time this topic gets...

Zero chance this guy isn't Rich or Rich adjacent. I do appreciate that he's too stupid to keep his mouth shut every time this topic gets bumped so it stays up here longer than it otherwise would.

mxxcdez wrote:
Zero chance you and the same dozen people would post here again. "I do appreciate that he's too stupid to keep his mouth shut every time...

Zero chance you and the same dozen people would post here again. "I do appreciate that he's too stupid to keep his mouth shut every time this topic gets bumped so it stays up here longer than it otherwise would."

You understand that constantly reminding people about this story is only good for one side of the argument, right? 

4
mxxcdez
Posts
60
Joined
6/4/2024
Location
socal, CA, USA
1/22/2025 9:31am
truck wrote:
Zero chance this guy isn't Rich or Rich adjacent. I do appreciate that he's too stupid to keep his mouth shut every time this topic gets...

Zero chance this guy isn't Rich or Rich adjacent. I do appreciate that he's too stupid to keep his mouth shut every time this topic gets bumped so it stays up here longer than it otherwise would.

mxxcdez wrote:
Zero chance you and the same dozen people would post here again. "I do appreciate that he's too stupid to keep his mouth shut every time...

Zero chance you and the same dozen people would post here again. "I do appreciate that he's too stupid to keep his mouth shut every time this topic gets bumped so it stays up here longer than it otherwise would."

truck wrote:

You understand that constantly reminding people about this story is only good for one side of the argument, right? 

You're right.

4
1/22/2025 9:35am Edited Date/Time 1/22/2025 3:29pm

Slogan ideas! I'll start: 

You Can't spell "Track Closed" Without EKS

X-Brand: The Ex is for Your Track

EKS: Ending Kids' Sporting

If you don't have X-Brand, you can't win (a litigation). 

EKS Goggles: Never settle for less... and always settle for more!

EKS: Every knucklehead sues

13
1
1/22/2025 9:46am
mxxcdez wrote:
It's baffling that LACR (or any other track) is not held responsible for anything; everyone disregards egregious or overlooked errors in track design, lack of maintenance...

It's baffling that LACR (or any other track) is not held responsible for anything; everyone disregards egregious or overlooked errors in track design, lack of maintenance and precautions, staff/facilities mismanagement, and policing of idiot pit bike/UTV riders/golf kart drivers. Tracks and their management are not above negligence or ignorance.

Tracks that do a good job of managing their facility and ridership get a thumbs up, and plenty of them do it right. There are a few tracks and operators that do a piss-poor job of controlling and maintaining their venue and ridership. It's time to tighten up operations and do better across the board.

What a dumb take. No one is forcing you to suit up and ride. If the track is too "negligent" for you, then don't ride it? If you do, don't cry about an accident. 

13
mxxcdez
Posts
60
Joined
6/4/2024
Location
socal, CA, USA
1/22/2025 9:58am
mxxcdez wrote:
It's baffling that LACR (or any other track) is not held responsible for anything; everyone disregards egregious or overlooked errors in track design, lack of maintenance...

It's baffling that LACR (or any other track) is not held responsible for anything; everyone disregards egregious or overlooked errors in track design, lack of maintenance and precautions, staff/facilities mismanagement, and policing of idiot pit bike/UTV riders/golf kart drivers. Tracks and their management are not above negligence or ignorance.

Tracks that do a good job of managing their facility and ridership get a thumbs up, and plenty of them do it right. There are a few tracks and operators that do a piss-poor job of controlling and maintaining their venue and ridership. It's time to tighten up operations and do better across the board.

What a dumb take. No one is forcing you to suit up and ride. If the track is too "negligent" for you, then don't ride it...

What a dumb take. No one is forcing you to suit up and ride. If the track is too "negligent" for you, then don't ride it? If you do, don't cry about an accident. 

Here is a simpler take with redactions. "It's baffling that any track is not held responsible for anything;" The statement has nothing to do with suiting up and taking risks; that is implied. It has to do with tracks assuming responsibility for their actions as well. It should be a mutual and symbiotic relationship. Sometimes, negligence is unknown until something adverse happens or it is tested. There are always two sides to every situation, story, or whatever you want to call it. 

2
12
yak651
Posts
8880
Joined
8/26/2006
Location
Appleton, WI, USA
Fantasy
1/22/2025 10:08am
Tortuga wrote:
Obviously Taylor's lawsuit didn't help matters, but it was also 7 years ago. Unfortunately LACR is fighting a new lawsuit (Jan 2024) where it appears a...

Obviously Taylor's lawsuit didn't help matters, but it was also 7 years ago. Unfortunately LACR is fighting a new lawsuit (Jan 2024) where it appears a mother is suing because her son was injured at a practice day. Look it up on Google, easy to find.

GrapeApe wrote:
That one should get the attention of all of the adults that are forced to ride their 450s on the same track and at the same...

That one should get the attention of all of the adults that are forced to ride their 450s on the same track and at the same time as kids on 50s. She sued not only the track and track crew but the rider that landed on her son under the theory he shouldn't have been going so fast to allow his tires to leave the ground when there are 6 year old kids on the track.

NSP139 wrote:

The CPS should be going after the mom for letting her 6 year old on the track with 450s!

Should go after Rich also for not walking the track to ensure it was safe before letting his minor son on it to get hurt.  Wonder if his kid was wearing EKS brand that fateful day? Should probably sue them for not allowing him to clearly see that berm all the other riders negotiated safely that day…

9
Tyler D
Posts
2411
Joined
12/5/2022
Location
La, CA, USA
1/22/2025 10:14am
mxxcdez wrote:
It's baffling that LACR (or any other track) is not held responsible for anything; everyone disregards egregious or overlooked errors in track design, lack of maintenance...

It's baffling that LACR (or any other track) is not held responsible for anything; everyone disregards egregious or overlooked errors in track design, lack of maintenance and precautions, staff/facilities mismanagement, and policing of idiot pit bike/UTV riders/golf kart drivers. Tracks and their management are not above negligence or ignorance.

Tracks that do a good job of managing their facility and ridership get a thumbs up, and plenty of them do it right. There are a few tracks and operators that do a piss-poor job of controlling and maintaining their venue and ridership. It's time to tighten up operations and do better across the board.

What a dumb take. No one is forcing you to suit up and ride. If the track is too "negligent" for you, then don't ride it...

What a dumb take. No one is forcing you to suit up and ride. If the track is too "negligent" for you, then don't ride it? If you do, don't cry about an accident. 

mxxcdez wrote:
Here is a simpler take with redactions. "It's baffling that any track is not held responsible for anything;" The statement has nothing to do with suiting...

Here is a simpler take with redactions. "It's baffling that any track is not held responsible for anything;" The statement has nothing to do with suiting up and taking risks; that is implied. It has to do with tracks assuming responsibility for their actions as well. It should be a mutual and symbiotic relationship. Sometimes, negligence is unknown until something adverse happens or it is tested. There are always two sides to every situation, story, or whatever you want to call it. 

"sometimes negligence is unknown..."

not really. BY DEFINITION negligence arises out of an act or failure act that a REASONABLE PERSON would have foreseen as likely to cause harm. 

if it's unknown, and not carelessly so, it's not really negligence. for example, failure to provide meteorite nets over your track is not negligence. 

10
1
mikelawlor
Posts
174
Joined
12/4/2022
Location
Johnsonville, NY, USA
1/22/2025 10:18am

I see one instance where a track should be held liable in a on track incident. If a machine (tractor, dozer) is being operated on the track while bikes are riding on it and someone smokes it would definitely be a tracks fault. Everything else like track design, holes in the track. Huge rocks exct could all be identified by a rider by either walking the track in the morning or taking a actual slow sight lap in there first practice session. Any respectable track would gladly issue a refund if a rider thought the track was to dangerous for them. The icing on the cake for this whole shitty situation is the guy makes his fucking living from people who ride. It would be like Pro Circuit suing Renthal because there bar broke on one of there race bikes and injured the rider. Seems pretty fuckin stupid. 

8
1/22/2025 10:21am Edited Date/Time 1/22/2025 11:49am

Slogan ideas! I'll start: 

You Can't spell "Track Closed" Without EKS

X-Brand: The Ex is for Your Track

EKS: Ending Kids' Sporting

If you don't have X-Brand, you can't win (a litigation). 

EKS Goggles: Never settle for less... and always settle for more!

EKS: Every knucklehead sues

EKS Goggles: Be the killer at your track.

X-Brands for insurance bands!

EKS: Enjoying Kingsize Settlements

5
3strokemx
Posts
2849
Joined
9/2/2010
Location
USA
1/22/2025 10:44am
mxxcdez wrote:
Here is a simpler take with redactions. "It's baffling that any track is not held responsible for anything;" The statement has nothing to do with suiting...

Here is a simpler take with redactions. "It's baffling that any track is not held responsible for anything;" The statement has nothing to do with suiting up and taking risks; that is implied. It has to do with tracks assuming responsibility for their actions as well. It should be a mutual and symbiotic relationship. Sometimes, negligence is unknown until something adverse happens or it is tested. There are always two sides to every situation, story, or whatever you want to call it. 

Rich / NotRich, what specifically do you think LACR did that was negligent?   

3
mxxcdez
Posts
60
Joined
6/4/2024
Location
socal, CA, USA
1/22/2025 10:51am
What a dumb take. No one is forcing you to suit up and ride. If the track is too "negligent" for you, then don't ride it...

What a dumb take. No one is forcing you to suit up and ride. If the track is too "negligent" for you, then don't ride it? If you do, don't cry about an accident. 

mxxcdez wrote:
Here is a simpler take with redactions. "It's baffling that any track is not held responsible for anything;" The statement has nothing to do with suiting...

Here is a simpler take with redactions. "It's baffling that any track is not held responsible for anything;" The statement has nothing to do with suiting up and taking risks; that is implied. It has to do with tracks assuming responsibility for their actions as well. It should be a mutual and symbiotic relationship. Sometimes, negligence is unknown until something adverse happens or it is tested. There are always two sides to every situation, story, or whatever you want to call it. 

Tyler D wrote:
"sometimes negligence is unknown..."not really. BY DEFINITION negligence arises out of an act or failure act that a REASONABLE PERSON would have foreseen as likely to...

"sometimes negligence is unknown..."

not really. BY DEFINITION negligence arises out of an act or failure act that a REASONABLE PERSON would have foreseen as likely to cause harm. 

if it's unknown, and not carelessly so, it's not really negligence. for example, failure to provide meteorite nets over your track is not negligence. 

You are correct. I will redact negligence is uknown and simply quote  "BY DEFINITION negligence arises out of an act or failure act that a REASONABLE PERSON would have foreseen as likely to cause harm."  So it was said the track was negliegent because a reasonable person forsaw that the feature (corner) in question would cause harm and was not corrected or announced to others that did not forsee it. The fact that others did not foresee or notice the issue usually does not absolve the track once a hazard is (or should have been) discovered.

1
6
3strokemx
Posts
2849
Joined
9/2/2010
Location
USA
1/22/2025 10:56am

EKS Brand "Make your local track and Ex-track"

 

5
1
1/22/2025 11:08am
mxxcdez wrote:
Here is a simpler take with redactions. "It's baffling that any track is not held responsible for anything;" The statement has nothing to do with suiting...

Here is a simpler take with redactions. "It's baffling that any track is not held responsible for anything;" The statement has nothing to do with suiting up and taking risks; that is implied. It has to do with tracks assuming responsibility for their actions as well. It should be a mutual and symbiotic relationship. Sometimes, negligence is unknown until something adverse happens or it is tested. There are always two sides to every situation, story, or whatever you want to call it. 

Tyler D wrote:
"sometimes negligence is unknown..."not really. BY DEFINITION negligence arises out of an act or failure act that a REASONABLE PERSON would have foreseen as likely to...

"sometimes negligence is unknown..."

not really. BY DEFINITION negligence arises out of an act or failure act that a REASONABLE PERSON would have foreseen as likely to cause harm. 

if it's unknown, and not carelessly so, it's not really negligence. for example, failure to provide meteorite nets over your track is not negligence. 

mxxcdez wrote:
You are correct. I will redact negligence is uknown and simply quote  "BY DEFINITION negligence arises out of an act or failure act that a REASONABLE...

You are correct. I will redact negligence is uknown and simply quote  "BY DEFINITION negligence arises out of an act or failure act that a REASONABLE PERSON would have foreseen as likely to cause harm."  So it was said the track was negliegent because a reasonable person forsaw that the feature (corner) in question would cause harm and was not corrected or announced to others that did not forsee it. The fact that others did not foresee or notice the issue usually does not absolve the track once a hazard is (or should have been) discovered.

That "reasonable person" tells that story AFTER the crash. Was he telling the truth? Nobody except him knows for sure.

The crash happened late in the day, I think, and also if I'm remembering correctly it was not the kids first moto. So he'd been on the track multiple times already and didn't think enough of that berm design to even bring it up.

The bottom line for me in this one, is ANY track I've ever ridden on, if you get whiskey throttle at any point and fly off the track you are going to have issues.

My local track, Hangtown, if you get whiskey throttle in different corners and fly off the track...you're going to hit a fence. A tree. A pond. A rock pit. The scoring tower. 

Rich "won" here. Period. Got his money. His son is still living a good life (sincerely this is GOOD news regardless of the lawsuit), but still makes the lawsuit even worse in my eyes. His brand is still apparently successful, being advertised on very popular podcasts and on this very website.

I think that still pisses a lot of people off, myself included. He bit the hand that feeds him, yet it still continues to feed him. To me that's ridiculous and only encourages future lawsuits.

13

Post a reply to: Statement from Rich Taylor (LACR Lawsuit)

The Latest