## Facts

- Lori S. Auckenthaler joined a group horseback ride near Reno during a dog field-training event organized by Steven Grundmeyer.
- Jody White rode “Bum,” a horse owned by Grundmeyer; White and Grundmeyer were involved in the training activity, while other riders attended as observers.
- The outing was recreational; no participant received compensation or commercial benefit.
- Bum acted nervous and threatened to kick nearby horses; Bum had been recently gelded.
- When Auckenthaler’s horse moved too close, Bum kicked, striking Auckenthaler’s leg and injuring her.
- Auckenthaler sued White and Grundmeyer for negligence, alleging White unreasonably continued riding a dangerous horse and Grundmeyer unreasonably provided White a horse he knew was aggressive and anxious.

## Issues

1. Whether Nevada should apply a reduced standard of care for participants in recreational activities, limiting liability to intentional or reckless conduct rather than ordinary negligence.
2. Whether importing a reduced “sports” standard is consistent with Nevada’s comparative negligence regime and Nevada’s abolition of implied assumption of risk (except express assumption).

## Decision

- The Nevada Supreme Court reversed the summary judgment for White and Grundmeyer and remanded.
- The court held that Nevada applies the ordinary negligence standard to recreational-activity injury claims.
- The district court erred by adopting a California-style rule limiting liability to reckless or intentional conduct.

## Legal Principles

- Nevada’s comparative negligence statute subsumes implied assumption of risk; only express assumption of risk remains as a distinct bar or limitation.
- Courts may not reintroduce implied assumption of risk indirectly by reducing the duty of care in recreational-activity cases to recklessness or intent.
- Ordinary negligence is sufficiently flexible to account for the context of recreational activities, with comparative fault addressing participant conduct and risk-taking.

## Conclusion

The court reinstated the negligence claims because Nevada law does not recognize a special reckless-or-intentional liability standard for recreational participants; instead, ordinary negligence applies, and comparative negligence governs any allocation of fault.


Auckenthaler v. Grundmeyer, 110 Nev. 682, 877 P.2d 1039 (Nev. 1994)