## Facts

- Quest Expeditions, Inc. operated commercial white-water rafting trips on the Ocoee River in Tennessee.
- Nathan Henderson, an adult with no prior rafting experience, signed Quest’s preprinted “Waiver and Release of Liability” as a condition of participation.
- Henderson asserted by affidavit that no Quest employee reviewed the waiver with him and that he was not advised of alternatives (such as rafting without a waiver or paying more to avoid signing).
- After the rafting trip, Quest transported participants by school bus from the river; Henderson and others were told to transfer from one bus to another.
- While disembarking during the transfer, Henderson slipped and fell and claimed serious injuries caused by Quest’s negligence.
- The waiver repeatedly stated that Henderson released Quest from liability for its own negligence and defined the covered activity broadly to include transportation to and from the river.

## Issues

1. Whether the waiver releasing Quest from liability for its own negligence in connection with a commercial recreational rafting trip was void as against Tennessee public policy.
2. Whether, even if enforceable, the waiver was excessive in scope and did not cover an injury occurring while disembarking from a bus after the rafting trip.

## Decision

- The trial court granted summary judgment to Quest based on the waiver.
- The Tennessee Court of Appeals affirmed.
- The court held the waiver was not void on public-policy grounds because a voluntary recreational activity does not implicate the “public interest” limits applicable to certain essential or heavily regulated services.
- The court held the waiver’s language was clear and unambiguous in releasing Quest from ordinary negligence and encompassed transportation connected to the rafting excursion, including the bus-transfer incident.
- With no genuine dispute that Henderson signed the waiver and with enforceability and scope resolved as matters of law, Quest was entitled to judgment.

## Legal Principles

- Tennessee generally permits parties to contractually allocate the risk of ordinary negligence when the intent to do so is clear.
- Public-policy limits on exculpatory clauses apply mainly where the transaction implicates the public interest (for example, essential services or relationships marked by special dependence), assessed using factors drawn from Tennessee precedent.
- Exculpatory agreements for voluntary recreational sports typically do not implicate the public interest and are generally enforceable absent a specific statutory bar or comparable exceptional circumstance.
- A release that clearly covers the provider’s own negligence and defines the covered activity to include related transportation will bar negligence claims arising during those covered phases.

## Conclusion

The court enforced a commercial rafting waiver that expressly released the outfitter from ordinary negligence, holding that recreational waivers generally fall outside Tennessee’s public-interest bar and that the waiver’s broad, clear language covered injuries occurring during post-trip transportation.


Henderson v. Quest Expeditions, Inc., 174 S.W.3d 730 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005)