Swimming Pool Accident: When Injured Party is at Fault

Pool owners generally are held to a high standard of liability for damages after a swimming pool accident because they are responsible for keeping the pool area contained and safe for all guests and potential trespassers.  This liability applies to homeowners, hotels, public pools, and any other person or organization that owns and maintains a pool.  Although the rules of liability will make the pool owner at least partially responsible to pay damages to the injured party, occasionally the actions of the injured party that led to the accident can reduce, to some degree, the amount of money the pool owner is responsible for. If you have been injured in a swimming pool accident for which you share part of the blame, consult an experienced personal injury attorney who is familiar with swimming pool liability law in your state before filing an insurance claim or pursuing legal action.

Swimming Pool Liability for Drunken Pool Accidents

Whether or not the injured party’s alcohol consumption alters a swimming pool accident case ultimately depend on how much the drinking and drunken behavior contributed to the injuries. If the alcohol consumption was severe, and the pool was well protected, and the accident was entirely the fault of the injured party, then a jury may find comparative negligence to reduce the liability of the pool owner (providing state law allows it).  If, on the other hand, the conditions around the pool were dangerous, then the pool owner may be fully liable regardless of the drunken condition of the injured party.

Swimming Pool Liability When Warning Signs are Ignored

If a person is injured after diving in a “no diving” area or swimming “at their own risk,” the pool owner’s liability may be reduced depending on the circumstances and the age of the injured party.  If the injury occurred during a direct and obvious violation of the posted warning, and the person was old enough and mature enough to recognize the dangers articulated by the signs, then the injured party may share in the responsibility.  If a child is injured, their actions will be judged base on the standard of care and knowledge of children of similar age and experience.  The court would also consider the child’s capacity to understand and avoid the danger to which she was exposed by diving into a shallow pool.  As with shared liability of drunken victims, if a pool owner can show the injured party shares liability because they ignored warning signs or known dangers, then the money owed will be reduced in accordance with the liability of the injured party.  In some states, the injured victim may not be able to recover damages at all.

TIP:  The contributing negligence of an injured victim could affect an insurance claim more than a pool injury lawsuit.  If you were responsible for your injuries and are trying to claim insurance money from your insurer or the pool owners, the company will likely point to your actions as a reason to short-pay or deny coverage.  An experienced attorney can be a critical ally in disputes over swimming pool accident liability.

Case Studies: Swimming Pool Accident Liability

Case Study 1: Drunken Pool Accident

John, after consuming excessive alcohol, dives into a shallow pool despite clear warning signs against diving. His actions lead to severe injuries. In the ensuing lawsuit against the pool owner, the court evaluates the extent of John’s intoxication and the pool’s safety measures to determine shared liability and the pool owner’s responsibility for damages.

Case Study 2: Ignoring Warning Signs

Sarah, a teenager, ignores warning signs and swims in a restricted area, resulting in an accident. The court assesses whether Sarah understood the dangers stated in the signs and whether she should share responsibility for her actions. The pool owner’s liability is weighed against Sarah’s capacity to comprehend the risks.

Case Study 3: Shared Liability

Michael sustains injuries while swimming in a pool with malfunctioning safety equipment. However, investigations reveal that he had previously tampered with the equipment. The court must decide the extent to which Michael’s actions contributed to the accident and how it impacts the pool owner’s liability.