Three friends from Florida were going cross-country skiing in Michigan. Shirley, the first skier came to a stop sign on the trail, waved at her companions and stopped. Jackie, the second to approach, was going too fast to stop, veered to the left and tripped over a log. Jane, the third skier was going so fast she clipped Shirley’s skis, fell over Jackie and slammed into a tree. Jane broke bones in her right arm and leg, which required surgery to repair the injuries. Jane filed a lawsuit against Shirley and Jackie in a trial court in Florida, claiming that each of her friends was liable to her for their negligent skiing. A Michigan statute specifically stated that snow skiers assumed the risks associated with skiing. Florida law did not contain an assumption of the risk rule regarding skiing. The two defendants made a motion for summary judgment. Does Michigan or Florida law apply to this case? Explain

Respuesta :

The Michigan law will apply to this case because this incident occurred in cross-country skiing in Michigan.

If the accident happened in Michigan would that not traditionally be the jurisdiction? Would they have to petition the courts to move it to Florida?

Because Michigan has subject matter jurisdiction over the case and because the trial court there has knowledge and competence in ski-related accidents and SASA liability, and the accident happened there, Michigan has historically been the venue for the trial.

To hear a case, a court must have both subject matter and personal jurisdiction over the matter. Personal jurisdiction takes a back seat to subject matter jurisdiction. Jane may request that the lawsuit be moved to Florida.

To know more about Michigan law, click here- brainly.com/question/4744008

#SPJ4