Defendant didn’t own waterslide at time of injury

Where the record demonstrated the defendant did not own or operate a waterslide at the time of a woman’s alleged injury, and she offered no evidence or testimony establishing notice of an unsafe condition, the defendant was granted summary judgment.

Background

Izabela Tympel alleges she was injured due to the negligence of Premier Parks LLC in maintaining and operating a waterslide at Ocean Breezes Waterpark in Virginia Beach. Premier Parks argues that it does not own or operate Ocean Breeze and thus owed no duty to Tympel.

Alternatively, the company contends Tympel has produced no evidence that an unsafe condition existed, and even if such a condition existed, Premier Parks lacked notice, constructive or actual, of the allegedly hazardous condition before Tympel’s injury.

Tympel has filed a response, conceding that she does not have any evidence to oppose Premier Parks’ motion for summary judgment.

Report and Recommendation

Tympel alleges several theories, all charging Premier Parks with negligence in the operation and maintenance of the Ocean Breeze Waterpark ride where her injury occurred. Although the allegations of negligence against any party are thin, Premier Parks’ motion can be resolved on the basis that it owed no duty to Tympel because it did not own or operate the park at the time of her injury.

Moreover, Tympel’s evidence of notice of any unsafe condition as to any party is scarce. She has not engaged any expert to testify as to the proper inflation of waterslide rafts. Although she believes the raft was underinflated, she also stated that several rafts felt the same and she eventually concluded this was normal. She had no evidence of what the inflation pressure was or should have been. She did not speak with any employees or attendants about her concern either before or after her injury.

For the foregoing reasons, the undersigned recommends that the court grant Premier Parks’ motion for summary judgment and dismiss the complaint with prejudice.

District court

The court adopts and approves in full the findings and recommendations set forth in the magistrate judge’s thorough and well-reasoned report and recommendation. Accordingly, Premier Parks’ motion for summary judgment is granted and plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed with prejudice as to Premier Parks.

Defendant’s motion for summary judgment granted.

Tympel v. Premier Parks LLC, Case No. 19-cv-64, Dec. 11, 2019. EDVA at Norfolk (Smith). VLW 019-3-580. 11 pp.