Court Opinion

ID: 9813877
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 23:23:50.784053+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:32:35.080322
License: Public Domain

*105Markus, P.J.,
concurs in judgment only.
Appendix
Appellants’ assignments of error are as follows:
“Assignment of Error No. One
“The trial court erred in granting ap-pellee’s motion for summary judgment since there is a genuine issue of material fact with respect to appellant Michael Tome’s alleged contributory negligence.
“Assignment of Error No. Two
“The trial court erred in granting ap-pellee’s motion for summary judgment since even if Michael Tome was negligent per se, this defense is insufficient to bar appellants’ claim as a matter of law.
“Assignment of Error No. Three
“The trial court erred in granting ap-pellee’s motion for summary judgment since there is a genuine issue of material fact with respect to appellant Michael Tome’s alleged assumption of the risk.
“Assignment of Error No. Four
“The trial court erred in granting ap-pellee’s motion for summary judgment since there is a genuine issue of material fact with respect to appellant Phillip D. White’s alleged assumption of the risk.
“Assignment of Error No. Five
“The trial court erred in granting ap-pellee’s motion for summary judgment since appellants have raised a justiciable and cognizable claim for relief.
“Assignment of Error No. Six
“The trial court erred in granting ap-pellee’s motion for summary judgment since there are numerous genuine issues of material fact and appellee is not entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”