Consortium - more than marketing’s Post

Happy National Golf Lover's Day! ⛳ Celebrated on October 4th, the day marks the possibility for golf enthusiasts to swing down the fairway at least one more time during the season. It's interesting to note that the first U.S. Men's Open Golf Championship was held on this day in 1895 in Newport, Rhode Island. When the legal field touches the golf greens, The Floyd Law Firm provides an integrated and coordinated approach to golf industry legal issues – with over 51 years of experience serving the golf community. #NationalGolfLoversDay #golfindustrylaw #thefloydlawfirm

The validity of the release in the case of the injured brother at the ski resort was upheld based on the testimony of the non-injured brother. The non-signing brother stated during his deposition that he had the authority to sign the release on behalf of his brother. This testimony was crucial in determining the validity of the release, and the courts accepted it as sufficient evidence to support the authorization of the signing brother. The courts found that the non-signing brother was firm in his statement about having the authority to sign for his brother, and therefore, the release was deemed valid. This case highlights the importance of clear and explicit authorization when signing releases on behalf of others, especially in situations involving potential risks or injuries. The courts relied on the testimony of the non-injured brother to uphold the release, emphasizing the significance of legally sound and informed authorization in such matters. https://lnkd.in/g7zkYJbc #Lawsuit #Injury @RecreationLaw #SkiLaw #SkiAreaLaw #RecLaw #RecreationLaw

The validity of the release in the case of the injured brother at the ski resort was upheld based on the testimony of the non-injured brother. The non-signing brother stated during his deposition that he had the authority to sign the release on behalf of his brother. This testimony was crucial in determining the validity of the release, and the courts accepted it as sufficient evidence to support the authorization of the signing brother. The courts found that the non-signing brother was firm in his statement about having the authority to sign for his brother, and therefore, the release was deemed valid. This case highlights the importance of clear and explicit authorization when signing releases on behalf of others, especially in situations involving potential risks or injuries. The courts relied on the testimony of the non-injured brother to uphold the release, emphasizing the significance of legally sound and informed authorization in such matters. https://lnkd.in/g7zkYJbc #Lawsuit #Injury @RecreationLaw #SkiLaw #SkiAreaLaw #RecLaw #RecreationLaw

The case discussed in the article sheds light on the limitations of indemnification clauses within ski area releases. The court ruled that the release in question was an adhesion contract, emphasizing that the language used attempted to go beyond acceptable bounds. This decision serves as a reminder that drafting releases with overly broad indemnification provisions may not hold up in court. It is crucial for ski areas to avoid being overly greedy and to ensure that their releases are fair and reasonable. This ruling highlights the importance of crafting releases in a professional manner, taking into account legal considerations and industry standards. https://lnkd.in/gXWN9BUw #Lawsuit #SkiFatality #Fatality #SkiLaw #SkiAreaLaw #RecLaw #RecreationLaw

The validity of the release was contingent upon the authorization of one brother to sign the electronic release on behalf of the other. The injured brother filed a lawsuit, challenging the authority of his non-signing brother to execute the release. However, during the deposition, the non-signing brother affirmed that he had indeed been authorized to sign on behalf of his brother. His unequivocal testimony was pivotal in the court's decision to uphold the release as valid. The courts accepted his testimony as credible and conclusive, thereby validating the release. This case underscores the importance of clear and explicit authorization when executing releases on behalf of another individual, particularly in the context of recreational activities. It also highlights the significance of obtaining accurate and unambiguous testimony to establish the validity of such releases. https://lnkd.in/gyr5vBuS #Release #Waiver #SkiRental @RecreationLaw #SkiAreaLaw #SkiLaw #RecLaw #RecreationLaw

The validity of the release in the case of the injured brother at the ski resort was upheld based on the testimony of the non-injured brother. The non-signing brother stated during his deposition that he had the authority to sign the release on behalf of his brother. This testimony was crucial in determining the validity of the release, and the courts accepted it as sufficient evidence to support the authorization of the signing brother. The courts found that the non-signing brother was firm in his statement about having the authority to sign for his brother, and therefore, the release was deemed valid. This case highlights the importance of clear and explicit authorization when signing releases on behalf of others, especially in situations involving potential risks or injuries. The courts relied on the testimony of the non-injured brother to uphold the release, emphasizing the significance of legally sound and informed authorization in such matters. https://lnkd.in/g7zkYJbc #Lawsuit #Injury @RecreationLaw #SkiLaw #SkiAreaLaw #RecLaw #RecreationLaw

The validity of the release in the case of the injured brother at the ski resort was upheld based on the testimony of the non-injured brother. The non-signing brother stated during his deposition that he had the authority to sign the release on behalf of his brother. This testimony was crucial in determining the validity of the release, and the courts accepted it as sufficient evidence to support the authorization of the signing brother. The courts found that the non-signing brother was firm in his statement about having the authority to sign for his brother, and therefore, the release was deemed valid. This case highlights the importance of clear and explicit authorization when signing releases on behalf of others, especially in situations involving potential risks or injuries. The courts relied on the testimony of the non-injured brother to uphold the release, emphasizing the significance of legally sound and informed authorization in such matters. https://lnkd.in/g7zkYJbc #Lawsuit #Injury @RecreationLaw #SkiLaw #SkiAreaLaw #RecLaw #RecreationLaw

Reflecting on Masters Week here in #Georgia, it's hard not to draw parallels between the precision of golf and the artistry of trial law. As visitors inquire about the golf clubs in my office, I often find myself likening the trial process to the strategic intricacies of the game. Just as a golfer meticulously organizes their thoughts and perceives each shot, trial lawyers meticulously plan their case, weighing every move with precision and discipline. In both endeavors, success hinges on knowing where you stand and where you're headed. Just as a golfer must be aware of their footing and club position at all times, trial lawyers must consider the sequence of witnesses, the impact of each testimony, and the nuanced decisions that shape the narrative of a case. Whether deciding the order of medical experts or evaluating the timing of witness testimony, the preparation for trial mirrors the nuanced challenges of golf. And just as I find joy in the game of golf, I find fulfillment in the strategic dance of trial law. It's a passion rooted in the appreciation for precision, strategy, and the pursuit of excellence. https://lnkd.in/enzaSCDw #hastypope #masters #golf #mastersgolf #triallawyers #cherokeecountyga #cantonga #cantongeorgia #gainesvillega

The validity of the release in the case of the injured brother at the ski resort was upheld based on the testimony of the non-injured brother. The non-signing brother stated during his deposition that he had the authority to sign the release on behalf of his brother. This testimony was crucial in determining the validity of the release, and the courts accepted it as sufficient evidence to support the authorization of the signing brother. The courts found that the non-signing brother was firm in his statement about having the authority to sign for his brother, and therefore, the release was deemed valid. This case highlights the importance of clear and explicit authorization when signing releases on behalf of others, especially in situations involving potential risks or injuries. The courts relied on the testimony of the non-injured brother to uphold the release, emphasizing the significance of legally sound and informed authorization in such matters. https://lnkd.in/g7zkYJbc #Lawsuit #Injury @RecreationLaw #SkiLaw #SkiAreaLaw #RecLaw #RecreationLaw

The case discussed in the article sheds light on the limitations of indemnification clauses within ski area releases. The court ruled that the release in question was an adhesion contract, emphasizing that the language used attempted to go beyond acceptable bounds. This decision serves as a reminder that drafting releases with overly broad indemnification provisions may not hold up in court. It is crucial for ski areas to avoid being overly greedy and to ensure that their releases are fair and reasonable. This ruling highlights the importance of crafting releases in a professional manner, taking into account legal considerations and industry standards. https://lnkd.in/gXWN9BUw #Lawsuit #SkiFatality #Fatality #SkiLaw #SkiAreaLaw #RecLaw #RecreationLaw