Geocaching Related Lawsuits

[+junglehair]

Has anyone ever heard of, or been a part of, a lawsuit regarding geocaching?

 

As you may be aware, the DEC in New York has issued a new policy regarding geocaching on State Forest lands. Basically, they require a $25 permit, plus proof of liability insurance. The limits of the policy must be at least $100,000 per person or $300,000 for multiple persons killed or injured in any accident and at least $5,000 for property damages.

 

The New York Geocaching Organization is working with the State to try to have this policy revoked. Hunting, hiking, rock climbing, cycling, snowmobiling and other activities are allowed in these areas without requiring liability insurance, so geocachers should have the same priviledges.

 

I am sure there are the odd injuries that occur while geocaching, but has anyone actually sued or been sued over this? Thought maybe some of the frequent forum posters in here would know if this has ever come up.

 

I know that Geocaching.com has their disclaimer that the cacher assumes all risk in using the services of their Website, but would that really hold up in court? Would that extend to cover the cache hider in the event that someone was actually injured while attempting to find that cache?

 

Just trying to gather some information here, so any input that you can provide would be appreciated.

[+TEAM 360]

I imagine Rothstafari (the legal beagle of Groundspeak-and I say that in a good way!) would have something to input on this topic, but he would probably rather discuss it one-on-one with you.

 

On versions of the Magellan software, I have noticed a big disclaimer that comes up when you turn on the GPS unit itself, so that if you walk off the edge of a cliff while staring at the screen, it might help to absolve Magellan of any responsibility for your death, should your family decide to sue....

 

It sounds like NY has decided to disallow geocaching in those areas, but didn't want to come right out and say it, so they just put next-to-impossible restrictions on it. Good luck in the crusade to get those kind of rules repealed, please keep us up to date on any progress!

[PyroDave]

Can I sue for pyscoligical damage caused by a cashe??

[+aka Monkey]

Can I sue for pyscoligical damage caused by a cashe??

Yes, but you'll have to learn to spell it first. And cache, too.

[+tstar]

The lawyers of the world must have job security, seeing as we live in a litigious society. The whole CYA that NY is doing just really sucks for caching. Just sad...

It doesn't matter if someone agrees to a disclaimer or signs a waiver, there is precedent set on both sides of the argument that can be used. Anyone can be sued?

I hope it never gets to the point where an injured cacher or a survivor of a cacher can change geocaching as we know it now.

 

Now let's all go out and break a leg!!

 

Tstar

[+Renegade Knight]

Every now and then I hear about a policy like this. It's absurd. I can see the politics. "We are protecting the taxpayer". However if their true purpose was to protect their tax payers and consitituants they would not have parks or open space to begin with. It's a way to say "No" without saying no.

[+Sagefox]

Basically, they require a $25 permit, plus proof of liability insurance.  The limits of the policy must be at least $100,000 per person or $300,000 for multiple persons killed or injured in any accident and at least $5,000 for property damages.

I would be curious to know if they require this level of insurance for ALL activities on their forest lands.

 

The best way to protect yourself from potential lawsuits is to place your caches where there is no "third party" exposure to injury. Third parties are non-caching citizens driving along minding their own business. If they become involved in an accident due to the actions of a geocacher then they can easily go after the cache owner. They have not signed or agreed to the gc.com waiver. You might want to think about that before you place a container in a guardrail on a busy highway.

Edited May 15, 2004 by Team Sagefox

[MOCKBA]

I think that geocaching is substantially different from hiking etc. Indeed, we keep hearing the "THIS IS A GAME" mantra over and over again. (And in fact widely played and well organized game with a commercial entity behind it, but that not what matters most).

A game activity organized on a public land may seem to fall into a category of activities and events requiring a special-use permit.

The best way of arguing against this IMO is to prove that

- there is no planning or scheduling of activities involved (is the FTF rush planned in way, though?)

- there is no specific, universally accepted game rules beyond just the common principles of courtesy (although it's often argued to the contrary in these forums...)

- there is no competition (although no matter how often TPTB stress it, a lot of players think otherwise)

and thus this weirdo passtime of geocaching is not a game or an organized activity in a legal sense. Or is it?

[+Renegade Knight]

...Third parties are non-caching citizens driving along minding their own business. If they become involved in an accident due to the actions of a geocacher then they can easily go after the cache owner...

In Idaho, landowners that permit people to use their lands and do not charge for it are immune to lawsuites. Permission to recreate doesn't imply any responsiblity whatsoever to ensure you don't get hurt while doing it.

 

I like the law and dislike that there is a need for it.

[+welch]

Has anyone ever heard of, or been a part of, a lawsuit regarding geocaching?

I am sure there are the odd injuries that occur while geocaching, but has anyone actually sued or been sued over this?

Off hand I can't think of hearing of any. There has of course been claims saying they would sue ('your company hates the handicap im suing you', 'your using my data w/o citing the source, im going to sue', 'I tripped on a culvert near a cache I went looking for, and I wasn't specially warned on the cache page. I unded up cutting my leg, im thinking of suing'), but I don't know that any of them got very far. Have you tried asking Groundspeak about what lawsuits they've been involved in?

 

I know that Geocaching.com has their disclaimer that the cacher assumes all risk in using the services of their Website, but would that really hold up in court? Would that extend to cover the cache hider in the event that someone was actually injured while attempting to find that cache?

Disclaimer or not, if someone has the time/money to they can and will attempt to sue you. Sucks, but thats how it is.

No idea, ask one the lawyers around here what they think about it holding up. I don't know, what the disclaimer says is "In no way shall Groundspeak Inc. nor any agent, officer, employee or volunteer administrator of Groundspeak Inc. ...", and "Cache seekers assume all risks involved in seeking a cache.", but nothing about any cache hiders.

[+PandyBat]

I'm not sure if this is true but seems like someone once told me that a disclaimer is the equivalent of a "Not responsible for accidents" sign you hang up at a yard sale. Unless you actually have a signature on that disclaimer, it's just a sign, not a contract. It looks good and you think that by hanging it, you are covered. But it wouldn't hold up in court. If you were selling a rifle at a yard sale and a potential customer accidentally shoots another customer, you still have some responsibility for the accident.

[+Cache Viking]

Basically, they require a $25 permit, plus proof of liability insurance.  The limits of the policy must be at least $100,000 per person or $300,000 for multiple persons killed or injured in any accident and at least $5,000 for property damages.

I would be curious to know if they require this level of insurance for ALL activities on their forest lands.

 

The best way to protect yourself from potential lawsuits is to place your caches where there is no "third party" exposure to injury. Third parties are non-caching citizens driving along minding their own business. If they become involved in an accident due to the actions of a geocacher then they can easily go after the cache owner. They have not signed or agreed to the gc.com waiver. You might want to think about that before you place a container in a guardrail on a busy highway.

third party. .... just wait until someone sues the individual who placed the cache because something happened. I hope this never happens but I have seen plenty of articles where people seem to think they are not responsible for their own actions.

[+hedberg]

My only question when you all are talking about this matter: What is wrong with common sense?????!???

 

If you can't handle it - don't do it!

If you can't dive - don't go hunting for underwater caches!

If you hate spiders - don't go hunting for caches in caves!

It is simple.. If you know your limits, don't push them...

 

I can't understand how people can be allowed to sue each other for stupid things, like: "I went for your cache but the cache description didn't warn me about a loose tiger that has escaped from a nearby zoo, and the tiger took a bite of my leg, so now am I suing you as a cache owner because you didn't warn me about the tiger."

 

Or: "I dropped my GPS in the ground while logging your cache, and you didn't warn me about the tarmac on the ground, and my GPS broke. So now am I suing you as a cache owner because your cache description didn't warn me about tarmac instead of grass."

[+cachew nut]

I know that Geocaching.com has their disclaimer that the cacher assumes all risk in using the services of their Website, but would that really hold up in court?  Would that extend to cover the cache hider in the event that someone was actually injured while attempting to find that cache?appreciated.

Check this out. A ordinary schmoe stumbles upon your cache while not in a fully opened window. He takes your coordinates and is off to hunt your cache. What disclaimer?

 

I could sue you for divorce if I wanted to, and only the judge would decide whether to throw it out or award it.

 

Edited May 15, 2004 by cachew nut

[+Cache Viking]

When it comes to Lawsuits anything is possible just read some of these > Stupid Lawsuit Collection

[+The Leprechauns]

I'm not sure if this is true but seems like someone once told me that a disclaimer is the equivalent of a "Not responsible for accidents" sign you hang up at a yard sale. Unless you actually have a signature on that disclaimer, it's just a sign, not a contract. It looks good and you think that by hanging it, you are covered. But it wouldn't hold up in court. If you were selling a rifle at a yard sale and a potential customer accidentally shoots another customer, you still have some responsibility for the accident.

Are you saying that a case about leaving a loaded gun in your front yard would be decided under the same legal principles as a case about slipping and falling down a hillside while hiking to a geocache? And also that a sign in a front yard is governed by the same legal precedent as a website user agreement? If so, under the laws of what jurisdiction?

 

I'm licensed to practice law in Pennsylvania. I follow recent case reports there, as well as the local geocaching groups' forums and I haven't heard of any lawsuits involving geocaching. With close to 3,000 caches and more than three years of logs being written, that's pretty cool. On that basis, the Pennsylvania DCNR concluded that geocaching was not the sort of "inherently dangerous activity" that would warrant imposing liability insurance and indemnification requirements as part of their geocaching policy. In doing so, they reversed their initial determination regarding these issues. By having an open dialogue with area geocachers, they changed their mind. A year's experience under the permit system has proven the merits of the decision. No problems, and hundreds of great cache hunts.

[+junglehair]

Thanks to everyone for their input. Especially Leprechauns - you give me hope that it's possible to have this decision reversed.