Case Name: David Carl ASHCROFT, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. CALDER RACE COURSE, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee/Cross-Appellant
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1985-02-19
Citations: 464 So. 2d 1250
Docket Number: No. 82-2629
Parties: David Carl ASHCROFT, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. CALDER RACE COURSE, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee/Cross-Appellant.
Judges: Before BASKIN, DANIEL S. PEARSON and JORGENSON, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 464
Pages: 1250–1255

Head Matter:
David Carl ASHCROFT, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. CALDER RACE COURSE, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee/Cross-Appellant.
No. 82-2629.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Feb. 19, 1985.
Rehearing Denied March 27, 1985.
Horton, Perse & Ginsberg and Arnold Ginsberg, Miami, Colodny & Fass, North Miami, Highsmith & Strauss, Miami, for appellant/cross-appellee.
Blackwell, Walker, Gray, Powers, Flick & Hoehl and James C. Blecke, Miami, for appellee/cross-appellant.
Before BASKIN, DANIEL S. PEARSON and JORGENSON, JJ.

Opinion:
JORGENSON, Judge.
This appeal requires us to determine whether the defense of express assumption of risk is available within the context of professional horse racing activity within the scope of Blackburn v. Dorta, 348 So.2d 287 (Fla.1977). We conclude that such a defense is available and, for the reasons which follow, reverse the order of the trial judge declining to enter judgment for the defendant.
David Ashcroft, a jockey, suffered catastrophic injuries when his horse, Kentucky Edd, veered across the race course through the seven-furlong exit gap. Ashcroft lost control of the horse and fell to the ground where he was run over by another horse, rendering him a quadriplegic. Ashcroft brought suit against Calder Race Course, Inc. (Calder) for damages alleging that the accident resulted from the negligent placement of the exit gap which he alleged resulted in Kentucky Edd's behavior. The case was tried to a jury which rendered an interrogatory verdict finding Calder negligent, Ashcroft not negligent; finding that Ashcroft had assumed the risk of the danger complained of, and assessing damages. The special interrogatory verdict included the following question regarding assumption of risk:
Question # 4 Did David Ashcroft know of the existence of the danger complained of, realize and appreciate the possibility of injury as a result of such danger; and, having a reasonable opportunity to avoid it, voluntarily and deliberately exposed himself to the danger complained of? X Yes _No
The form of the interrogatory verdict was expressly approved by the court in Kuehner v. Green, 436 So.2d 78 (Fla.1983). In addition to the interrogatory verdict, the trial court charged the jury on express assumption of risk pursuant to Florida Standard Jury Instruction 3.8. There is abundant evidence in this record supporting the jury's conclusion that Ashcroft expressly assumed the risk.
Ashcroft argues that the court's language in Blackburn limits the defense of express assumption of risk to contractual agreements or contact sports. That view, in our judgment, is too narrow. The Blackburn court clearly contemplated other professional sporting activity when it used the term "such as" when defining those cases in which actual consent exists and the express-assumption-of-risk defense is available. Blackburn, 348 So.2d at 290. The record reflects that, prior to the race which led to Ashcroft's tragic injuries, several meetings occurred between the jockeys racing at Calder and the Calder management. Ashcroft attended one of these meetings following an incident of a substantially similar nature. In fact, Ashcroft was riding Kentucky Edd on the date of that incident. Ashcroft personally asked about the location of the exit gap and inquired whether it was to be changed. He received advices that the gap would be moved at the end of the 1981 racing season. Additionally, there was evidence that Ashcroft knew of the tendency of horses to bolt through exit gaps. Cf. Baker v. Stolley, 155 So.2d 809 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963) (skilled horseman is charged with knowledge of propensities of a spirited horse). Ashcroft, an experienced jockey, admitted his familiarity with the particular horse, the track, and the location of the exit gap.
That horse racing is a dangerous activity hardly requires citation. Track operators, owners, and jockeys all take certain calculated risks when engaging in the sport of kings. See, e.g., Gulf Stream Park Racing Ass'n v. Miller, 119 So.2d 749 (Fla. 2d DCA), cert. denied, 125 So.2d 872 (Fla.1960). See generally Annot., 87 A.L. R.2d 1179 (1963); Annot., 13 A.L.R.4th 623 (1982), and cases cited therein. The location of the exit gap was open and obvious, well known to Ashcroft. It could hardly be characterized as a latent defect. Ashcroft's reliance on Cole v. New York Racing Ass'n, 24 A.D.2d 933, 266 N.Y.S.2d 267 (App.Div.1965), aff'd, 17 N.Y.2d 761, 270 N.Y.S.2d 421, 217 N.E.2d 144 (1966), is misplaced. The Cole court held that a construction deviation from general custom observed in the building of race track courses for economic reasons established the race track's negligence. No such evidence was adduced in the case below.
Calder has met the standard established in Kuehner and properly laid before the jury the question of assumption of risk. The jury having answered that question in the affirmative, Calder is absolved from liability. The trial court, therefore, erred when it failed to enter judgment for Calder. We accordingly reverse and remand with directions that it do so.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
. Our determination of this issue moots the other issuer raised by the parties in the appeal and cross-appeal.
. Florida Standard Jury Instruction 3.8 provides:
On the [second] defense, the issues for your determination are whether (claimant) knew of the existence of the danger complained of; realized and appreciated the possibility of injury as a result of such danger; and, having a reasonable opportunity to avoid it, voluntarily and deliberately exposed himself to the danger complained of.