Hiett v. Lake Barcroft Community Association
Link to case ---- https://law(dot)justia(dot)com/cases/virginia/supreme-court/1992/911395-1.html
OVERVIEW
A case brief is a dissection of a legal opinion, containing a written summary of the basic components of that decision. “Briefing” a case (opinion) helps the student understand the rule of law as interpreted by that particular court.
INSTRUCTIONS
Each student will carefully read a legal opinion (Hiett v. Lake Barcroft Community Association). Upon reading said case, each student will complete a case brief following the instructions outlined below.
After reading and analyzing the case, address the following issues:
1. Do you believe that certain topics should be ‘off limits’ when it comes to the subject matter of contracts? For example, should the Courts uphold contracts dealing with illegal issues (e.g. drugs, prostitution, etc.)?
2. Should triathlon participants be expected to honor their promise with respect to exculpatory clauses in contracts? In other words, does one’s promise ‘not to sue’ matter, despite the Supreme Court’s ruling?
3. Did you agree or disagree with the Court’s rationale in deciding the case?
4. Which authority should have jurisdiction (power/authority) over the issue of contracts and enforcement among private parties? Civil government, Church, Family, Self?
5. Reflect on the case in light of the truths outlined in the Christian worldview. Support your position using various Christian sources (e.g. Scripture, Catechisms, historic Christian Creeds, etc.).
Your paper must be completed based on the following criteria:
3 full pages;
2 scholarly citations;
1-inch margins;
Double-spaced;
12-point, Times New Roman font;
Put a title on the top line of the first page, and include your name. No other identifying information is needed. Do not include a separate cover page. Citations must be in APA format and included on a separate reference page.
Case Brief: Hiett v. Lake Barcroft Community Association
Your Name
Subject and Section
Professor’s Name
April 5, 2023
In the case of Hiett v. Lake Barcroft Community Association, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled in favor of Lake Barcroft Community Association (LBCA) regarding the exculpatory clause in the triathlon entry contract. This case raised several legal and ethical issues, which will be addressed in this brief.
Facts
LBCA organized a triathlon, and Hiett participated in the event. Hiett signed a release and waiver of liability agreement stating that she waived her right to sue LBCA for any injuries or damages that she may incur during the event (Hiett v. Barcroft Beach, Inc., 1989). Hiett later sustained injuries while participating in the triathlon and filed a lawsuit against LBCA. LBCA argued that Hiett had waived her right to sue them through the exculpatory clause in the release and waiver of liability agreement, and the court agreed with LBCA.
Issue 1 – Limits in Subject Matter of Contracts
The first issue raised in this case is whether specific topics should be off-limits regarding contracts. I believe contracts dealing with illegal issues should not be upheld by the court. Contracts contrary to public policy, such as contracts for illegal activities like drugs or prostitution, should be unenforceable. However, legal contracts, including exculpatory clauses, should be upheld if they are not against public policy (Stolle & Slain, 1997).
Issue 2 – Exculpatory Clauses in Contracts
Secondly, there is also the issue raised regarding whether triathlon participants should be expected to honor their promise concerning exculpatory contract clauses—the promise 'not to sue' matters because it is a voluntary agreement between two parties. If a person signs a contract that contains an exculpatory clause, they have agreed to waive their right to sue for injuries or damages that may occur during the event (Khalef et al., 2021). In the case of Hiett v. Lake Barcroft Community Association, Hiett signed the exculpatory clause and waived her right to sue LBCA. Therefore, she should have honored her promise not to sue.
Issue 3 – Opinion on Court’s Rationale
The third issue is whether I agree or disagree with the court's rationale in dec...