## Facts

- Washington public school districts adopted policies requiring students and parents to sign standardized liability releases to participate in interscholastic athletics (and, in one district, cheerleading).
- The release forms purported to waive future claims for the districts’ ordinary negligence arising from participation in the activity programs.
- In the Odessa district, minor students sought to participate in interscholastic sports; the district required executed releases as a condition of participation.
- In the Seattle district, minor students joining a high school wrestling program were required, along with their parents, to sign releases waiving negligence claims related to the program.
- Families challenged the releases as nonnegotiable and imposed by a public school system on minors and their parents as a condition for access to significant school activities.
- In separate superior court actions, one court enjoined enforcement of the releases while the other upheld them, and the matters were consolidated for appellate review.

## Issues

1. Whether public school districts may require students and parents to sign exculpatory releases waiving future negligence claims as a condition of participating in interscholastic athletics and related school activities.
2. Whether such releases are void as against public policy under public-interest limits on exculpatory agreements, including the factors commonly used to assess when an agreement affects the public interest.

## Decision

- The Washington Supreme Court held the release requirements violated public policy and were invalid.
- The court concluded the releases bore the characteristics of exculpatory agreements affecting the public interest, including standardized, nonnegotiable terms imposed by an entity with superior bargaining power.
- The court treated interscholastic athletics as closely connected to the public educational mission and broadly available to eligible students, supporting public-interest treatment.
- The court emphasized that school districts perform public duties and owe students a duty of reasonable care that cannot be contractually disclaimed for ordinary negligence through such releases.
- The court affirmed the judgment enjoining enforcement in the Odessa matter and reversed the judgment upholding the releases in the Seattle matter.

## Legal Principles

- Exculpatory clauses are unenforceable when they affect the public interest, including where the service is of public importance, offered broadly to the public, and provided under terms reflecting substantial bargaining inequality.
- A standardized, nonnegotiable release imposed as a condition of participation in public school programs may be treated as an adhesion contract for public-policy analysis.
- Public school districts, as governmental entities providing public education, may not use contractual waivers to avoid liability for their own ordinary negligence in administering student activities integral to the educational program.
- Cost and insurance considerations do not justify eliminating a public entity’s duty of reasonable care through mandatory waivers; policy changes of that scope are for legislative action rather than compelled private releases.

## Conclusion

The court invalidated mandatory parental and student releases that waived future negligence claims as a condition of participation in public school interscholastic activities, holding such exculpatory agreements contrary to public policy given the public character of schools, the districts’ duty of reasonable care, and the coercive, standardized nature of the waivers.


Wagenblast v. Odessa Sch. Dist. No. 105-157-166J, 110 Wn.2d 845, 758 P.2d 968 (Wash. 1988)