## Facts

- Barbara Schutkowski enrolled as a first-time student in a skydiving course offered by Dwain Carey (instructor) and Robert D. Rodekohr (pilot/instructor) through the Cheyenne Parachute Club.
- Before participating, Schutkowski signed a “Release and Indemnity Agreement” stating she “fully and forever” released the club, Rodekohr, their employees, and all persons directly or indirectly liable from “any and all” claims and causes of action for personal injuries “known and unknown” resulting from participation in the instruction course and parachute jumping.
- On July 1, 1979, during her first jump, Schutkowski landed away from the target and suffered injuries to her back, arm, and leg in a difficult landing.
- Schutkowski sued Carey and Rodekohr for negligence, alleging failure to warn of risks and failure to adequately instruct and direct her in skydiving and landing procedures.
- The trial court granted defendants summary judgment, ruling the release barred the negligence action.

## Issues

1. Whether the release was intended to, and did, exculpate defendants from liability for their own negligence.
2. Whether the release should be strictly construed to cover only injuries occurring without fault, rather than negligent conduct.
3. Whether enforcing the release in this setting violated public policy.

## Decision

- The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for the defendants.
- The court held the exculpatory clause was enforceable and clearly expressed an intent to release claims for injuries connected to the skydiving instruction and activity, including claims sounding in negligence.
- The court concluded that the absence of the word “negligence” did not defeat enforcement because the language was broad and unequivocal as to the scope of released claims.
- The court determined enforcement was not contrary to public policy because the activity was voluntary, recreational, and hazardous, and the release did not purport to excuse willful or wanton misconduct.

## Legal Principles

- Exculpatory clauses are disfavored and closely scrutinized, but may be enforced to bar negligence claims if they are not contrary to public policy.
- A release need not use “negligence” as a required term if the contract language clearly and unequivocally shows the parties’ intent to cover negligence liability.
- In voluntary hazardous recreational activities, broadly worded releases covering “any and all” claims for injuries “resulting from” participation may bar negligence actions, subject to limits for willful or wanton misconduct.
- Contract interpretation focuses on discerning intent from the instrument as a whole; where the scope is clear, courts will enforce the allocation of risk reflected in the agreement.

## Conclusion

The court enforced a broad pre-injury release signed by a first-time skydiving student and held it barred her negligence claims against the instructor and pilot because the agreement clearly released “any and all” injury claims arising from the instruction and jumping activity and did not violate public policy governing voluntary recreational risks.


Schutkowski v. Carey, 725 P.2d 1057 (Wyo. 1986)