TRIAL SET TO BEGIN IN $25 MILLION STUDENT CLAIM AGAINST CAL STATE SAN BERNARDINO*

JANUARY 3, 2021

Beginning Friday, Jan. 15, the California State University system will begin to defend itself in a $25-million case being described as possibly the largest civil trial in San Bernardino County since the onset of the coronavirus pandemic.

The case is rooted in an incident from Sept. 26, 2018 when Marissa Freemanwho, at the time, was a 19-year-old student at California State University San Bernardino (CSUSB)allegedly sustained brain and organ damage while participating in a class assignment.

That day as part of her Kinesiology class assignment, Freeman and her classmates were required to take a run (approximately 5K) through the school campus during which she purportedly suffered a heat stroke and collapsed. The jog was part of a physical fitness test on the first day of class.

Weather reports the day of the incident indicate temperatures reached a high of 93 degrees. According to court documents, her brain injury was so severe she now requires around-the-clock care.

In late January 2019, Freeman filed suit naming CSU and her Kinesiology professor, Angel Castro, as defendants. She claimed they not only failed to protect and warn her of the dangers of exercising in the heat, but also failed to provide medical care in a timely manner. Freemans attorney has noted there were other students who had no experience running long distances in hot weather. Freeman further accused CSU of negligence in how it hired and trained its employees.

The temperatures were very high and presented a serious risk of heat stroke to any participants in an athletic event outdoors, court documents described the alleged conditions that fateful day. Other students in the class witnessed Freeman faint and collapse to the ground and went to inform Castro and others of Freemans serious condition.

The documents further declare (i)t was only after Freeman had been laying on the ground for a substantial amount of time that any aid and/or paramedics arrived.

CSU has denied any liability for Freemans condition claiming in court documents the heat stroke was the result of the student overexerting herself. The school also claims the students were advised by the instructor to jog or walk at their own pace, to hydrate, stop for shade and not to push themselves.

The case became more complicated when CSU cross-sued the first responders and medical team at the hospital who treated Freeman advising it was their negligence in treating Freeman that supposedly caused her injuries, not the actions of the class instructor who made the jogging assignment.

This question asks you to consider litigation between Freeman (plaintiff) and California State University, San Bernardino (defendant) for negligence. In essence, this question tests your understanding of the tort of negligence, as per our discussion of Liebeck vs. McDonalds, and other fact scenarios, by asking you to apply what you learned from that case, and our discussions, to the current case, Freeman vs. Cal State San Bernardino

Provide a complete negligence analysis, which demonstrates which party you think will win this lawsuit, and why: