Its a pretty simple case really. A waiver is signed by the custie. Issue number one - is the waiver valid? If so, then did the actions of the guide go outside the normal so as to constitute negligence or gross negligence. He is obviously alleging gross neg as he is going to have a hard time saying a broken leg is a 4.5mm injury and some of that sum is for punitives.

Its clear from teh article that the custie is saying he and others did not want the raft to be spun and the guide did so anyway thereby going outside the waiver, and that is how he is alleging the negligence.

There is no fiduciary relationship between a raft guide and a custie. That would hold the raft guide to a much higher level. This is just a negligence case.


I would imagine the raft company will not settle this. Insurance company may want to, but it is in the best interest of the company to fight this one as once that bag of worms is opened, every custie who gets hurt will sue every time.