Undercurrent, the scuba diving magazine for serious divers reviews dive resorts and scuba diving equipment "Best of the Web ... scuba tips no other source dares to publish" — Forbes  
Authoritative   •   Independent   •   Nonprofit  
Public Area Online Members' Area Print Subscribers' Area
Home Travel Dive Gear Health & Safety Environment & Misc. Free Dive Articles Seasonal Planner Blogs Forums Books News
Reader Reports Recent Issues Back Issues Featured Reports Special Offers Search Join Login FAQ About Us Contact Links
September 2004 Vol. 19, No. 9     RSS Feed for Undercurrent Issues
What's this?

Only in California

from the September, 2004 issue of Undercurrent   Subscribe Now

In the summer of 2000, Renee Dirkx signed up for scuba lessons at a Sport Chalet store in Southern California. She was scheduled for a pool session, but said “her back was fatigued,” so her instructor, William Manrow apparently volunteered to perform a few manipulations on her back or, as Dirkx testified, he painfully “cracked” it several times.

In November, she felt a pop in her back that was diagnosed as a disk extrusion and she had surgery. The following year she filed suit against Manrow and Sports Chalet, claiming Manrow manipulations had caused her back injury. The jury ruled in her favor, but the case was appealed.

Manrow argued that, as any good instructor, he was only performing his “duty of care” by manipulating her back. The court said scuba instructors should not be manipulating the backs of their students.

He argued that his back manipulation was well within the course and scope of his employment with Sport Chalet. That made no sense to the court.

He then claimed protection under the PADI liability release she signed. (Yes, the same type of release we divers sign that absolves a dive operation of any liability, even if they are negligent). The court decided that the liability release did not relate to “chiropractic manipulations” or stretching exercises performed outside the scuba class ... and Manrow’s arguments regarding the applicability of the release were irrelevant.

Dirkx was awarded $80,000 in economic damages, but in reading the case, we have no doubt that legal fees were far greater.

(California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 3, California. DIRKX v MANROW, No. G031639. Super.Ct.No. 01CC08728).

I want to get all the stories! Tell me how I can become an Undercurrent Online Member and get online access to all the articles of Undercurrent as well as thousands of first hand reports on dive operations world-wide



Find in
Advanced Search

Sign up to receive our free
Undercurrent Online Update email
with news for serious divers
            Unsubscribe
We will not sell, exchange, or give your email address to any third party
.

| Home | Online Members Area | Print Subscribers Area |
My Account
| Travel Index | Dive Gear Index | Health/Safety Index | Environment & Misc. Index | Seasonal Planner | Forums | Blogs | Free Articles | Book Picks | News |
| Dive Resort & Liveaboard Reviews | Featured Reports | Recent Issues | Back Issues | Login | Join | Special Offers | FAQ | About Us | Contact Us | Links |


Copyright © 1996-2012 Undercurrent (www.undercurrent.org)
3020 Bridgeway, Ste 102, Sausalito, Ca 94965
All rights reserved.

cd