Zingg Lawsuit

Never underestimate GREED!!

Could have done something productive like make the AMA push higher chest protector standards like pro FIM

Mammoth is on national forest land I believe.

45 flaggers?  Could that be even remotely true?  How many would there be at the average national? 

*GREIF

I hope we don't loose public track as we know them. In Quebec, we had a bunch of tracks this year that had to postponed their opening because they had problems with their insurance. People sued skatepark in the 70's. Most of them closed down and skateboarding basically disappeared for the next 10-15 years. Now they have skatepark everywhere and nobody sues them. I don't know what changed. Maybe it's just a culture shift from skateboarders or there are laws now that prevent people  and insurance company from suing skateparks. It would be interesting to see what happened and if it could be applied to motocross track. Most injures in skatepark were probably minor in severity compared to injuries at the motocross track tho.

I would also like to know how are mountain bike park staying open without having a bunch of lawsuits filed against them. Injuries in mtb are plentyful, and if "an airpine turn" can be deemed too dangerous on a motocross track, imagine what they could argue about all the trees that are literally inches from your handlebar on a mtb trail. And that's not speaking about rolling on a 12 inches wide platform 10 feet in the air that suddenly drops into a rock garden. How come they don't get sued when somebody drops the front at the end of the platform and gets a catastrophic injury? Or maybe they do and I simply never heard about it.

Also, what's the point of the waiver that we sign at pretty much every track upon registration if we can simply sue the track after we get hurt anyway?

Yeah most likely that wasn’t on the track at one time, probably 45 individual flaggers throughout the weekend or something 

Ill start by saying this, I do not necessarily agree with the lawsuit. The reason for that is like mention a hundred times, we all know the risks. One thing I will acknowledge, Ive never seen a GOOD crew of flaggers. Ive seen people at tracks posing as flaggers that the couldnt even stand up for a full moto, had to bring a chair to sit in while they smoked 20 cigarettes and had a phone in the other hand. My son has penalized for "jumping" a roller section at one of the biggest races in the northeast because an incompetent flagger was standing where he couldnt be seen until it was too late. Same race, with my own eyes watching, a flagger stopped waving because he got confused, then started waving again seconds later causing mass confusion. The problem is, whats the solution? If we bring in professionals to do the job, itll price us out of the sport even further, and no one wants that. I am also interested to know the EXACT model of chest protector that he was wearing when this happened. To me, that will speak volumes. As a parent, I know the standards my kids need to meet before they get on a motorcycle, and theres a 0% chance they are riding without a chest protector. Furthermore, it is my responsibility to make sure I buy them something that is going to protect them. If I have them a roost guard without back protection, theyd wear it to appease me. Doesnt mean its actually going to protect vital organs.

Having spent many years at the Mammoth MX, I can say that they take flagging serious and do a great job. Many of them also work at the ski resort in the winter and have been flagging for many years. 
I’ve seen the flaggers you’re describing across the country, while traveling the amateur nationals with my son. I’d only imagine it’s gotten worse with the cell phone part. 

I have never seen mammoth understaffed with flaggers or EMTs, it is a first class and safe event. It is better flagged than any national. I am so sorry for the Zinks loss, but this action is horrible.

We aren't going to have any tracks left if parents keep suing them all. 

Just wait pretty soon we won't be able to ride anywhere, including national parks or any off road places cause they will sue cause there was a tree in the trail or a rock that spit them off. 

An additional thought that hadn't crossed my mind until laying in bed last night thinking about this topic - 

Years ago, Star West managed to be the only track in Southern CA, the weekend before A1, that didn't get rained out. I showed up & found the place to be a zoo, but I went out anyway.

100+ bikes in Open Practice with 50's - 450's coexisting on a tight track. The layout was mellow aside from the dumbest 100+ foot booter in the middle of the track that was completely blind (when I say booter, I mean BOOTER).

I did another lap, rolled the booter 5/6 feet to the left of a kid on a PW that was hugging the far-right side of the track. As we crested the landing, I hear a panic rev and a scream from above followed by a guy on a 450 landing between us. He missed both of us by no more than 18 inches - 

At that point I pulled off the track, rode back to my truck & proceeded to load up before my buddy had even gotten his bike started.

Was the track owner liable had Jr on the PW or I gotten landed on? An argument could be made that split practice & unnecessary obstacles contributed, but it wasn't the cause. 

What the cause would have been was me KNOWING the track was too crowded and going out anyway & the PW rider's dad being an absolute moron by putting him in that situation.

Every single time I ride, I give my wife and kids a hug & a kiss & tell them how much I love them because I KNOW there is a legitimate chance I don't come back to the truck. 

I know I am doing something that is not a necessity. I know I am doing something that is dangerous. I also know that it makes me happy, so that the risk is part of the game that no one is forcing me to play.

God Bless the Zingg family & may they find the peace they need to make it through each day. Grief tends to point the finger everywhere but inward & I hope they can find solace knowing their boy was happy.

I'm no expert by any means but I think that waiver would generally cover "inherent risks". 

But for example a water truck is driving across a live track and you run into it, that's not an inherent risk that's negligence I think most of us would agree that the track would be at fault for something like that. 

So obviously the line between what's an inherent risk and what is negligence is not a clear one so then you get these lawsuits that you would hope a jury would decide where that line is drawn but unfortunately its hard for a average joe to understand where that line is, hell its hard for us riders to decide in some of these cases too. 

Great promotion for your track 👍🏻

I’m just being real even if people don’t wanna say it…. Screwing over families like mine that put their entire lives into preserving our sport is wrong… 

Why not let all the facts come out before we start judging a family that just lost their son. 

Cause that fact is they chose to take him to the track. It started there.

So that’s makes it ok if the track was negligent and caused the death of this young man?I have know idea, but I have no issue with the family going to court with it.

Didn't Josh Lichtle's family do something very similar? I dont see that family's name getting dragged through the mud.

*If done right, a waiver can shield a track from liability for anything up to ordinary negligence. An individual cannot be asked to waive claims for gross negligence, though, and any attempt to do so is unenforceable. So, a track operator can be negligent and cause injury and as long as the waiver was drafted and executed properly and there is no finding of gross negligence the track will win the case (theoretically). The problem is only a trier of fact can determine if acts or omissions are negligence or gross negligence, and the only way to get that determination is in court be it judge or jury. In short, a proper waiver can't keep an operator from being sued but it can provide an enforceable defense to the claims. 

*in most if not all states

It is simply unacceptable that the race continued for 2 laps while he was down. There was no flagger at a particularly vulnerable section of the track.

Not only that, but the parents were given conflicting and contradictory information which led them to believe they were covering their asses and not being forthcoming. 

What is going to force track operators to think more carefully about flagger placement and perhaps better procedures for halting a race? Did they have good comms? 

A lawsuit doesn’t necessarily mean the family is trying to get money. Lawsuits can force change.

Everyone said something needed to change after Zingg’s death. What else compels change?

Really hope for an FTE reading on all of this. 

I've raced Mammoth since '82 and only the start concerns me, but that's a common place where stuff happens at any racetrack. I've unfortunately got to know the location of the local hospital very well over the years. 

I don't think change only happens with a lawsuit. I think the people in the sport genuinely care about safety and do what they can to address issues. 

This will not help our sport! I hope its not the family. Our community supported them in a big way and if its there doing its a slap in all our faces.

Shame on them. Don’t defend them

At the moment, the lawsuit does not appear to be about change but blame and the Zinng's are trying to place blame for his death on the promotor and Fox and not acknowledge that this is dangerous sport where death can happen at any given moment from a crash.  What is FOX negligent for? I will assume the promotor had flaggers in the required areas according to AMA regulations. 

From what I have been reading, the family was looking for change, not compensation.

I know this won't be a popular question, but what if the track was actually negligent?  Would anyone that lost a child in this manner say, "oh well, it's a dangerous sport".  Just because it a dangerous sport and a sport that we love doesn't make negligence ok. 

Before you flame me, I'm not saying that they were negligent, I'm just saying "What if".

Yeah we really don’t know what’s going on with the family. It’s one thing losing a child and it’s an even harder traumatic effect when you lose them to something you got them into. The heartache, guilt, blame game, what ifs etc 

I lost my 43 year old son around 4 years ago. It was followed by a divorce shortly thereafter to the girl I was with since high school. I’m self employed and my income dropped over 50% for the next few years just from a lack of motivation/depression. At first parents feel they can handle things and then as time goes by the wheels on life can begin unraveling. I see this lawsuit as it’s a time when the family is really beginning to feel the loss and it’s time in their minds to start fighting. Is it right? Of course it’s not the right way to deal with loss. Is it understandable? To most it’s not, to me it is understandable and that is why I will not make  one negative comment about Aiden’s family. 

Sorry for their loss - also sorry for anyone in their lawsuit who are going to face the brunt of a parents grief. 

I hope Mammoth survives along with the parents 

Id like to know if the kid was wearing CE protection for chest and back. Maybe he was and it didn’t matter in the crash but for me that’s the starting point of this lawsuit. Don’t point fingers at anyone else unless you were taking proper precautions first. If he was only wearing a roost protection then it almost wouldn’t matter to me anything else if I was on the jury. I hate talking like this about someone who has passed but the lawsuit opens up ALL sides to be questioned.