The LA Times has the story.  So far as I can tell, the actual report is not out there — at least I haven’t found it in a fairly brief search.  But I’ve put in a request with Cal/OSHA for it and will post it if I receive it.

Essentially, the report apparently says that Intamin didn’t do a good job telling Knott’s how frequently to check the cable, and that Knott’s didn’t check it frequently enough in any case.

No real details, but here’s the story.

(I wish I could have come up with another ‘T’ word for the title.)

I’m buried in end-of-semester stuff, so I can’t post much about it, but it is certainly worth noting that a trial started yesterday in a suit alleging personal injuries from Disney’s Tower of Terror ride.  The plaintiff alleges that he suffered a stroke as a result of the ride.

As the linked post notes, it’s unusual for two reasons: first, very few amusement park cases (especially against Disney) go to trial; and second, the suit doesn’t allege that anything went wrong — it just alleges that the ride is defectively designed.

Day on Torts has been posting excerpt from the author’s forthcoming book on the leading cases in Tennessee on a variety of subjects.  Today’s is on the subject of liability for amusement operators.

Details, such as they are, are here.  The story suggests that witnesses saw the teacups actually scraping against each other, which would, if true, be a big problem, but also pretty tough to have happen.

Details are sparse, but this story has most of what I’ve seen.  From the description and the rides page at the venue’s website, it seems likely to be a Zamperla Mini Teacup (here’s the page from Zamperla’s site).  The boy was evidently found on the floor with head injuries, which sounds consistent with falling or otherwise getting out of the ride.

The story also notes that the venue hadn’t informed the state regulatory agency within four hours of the accident, as Indiana law apparently requires.

Update: This story indicates that the venue’s permits lapsed in December, and had thus not been inspected in a timely way under state law.  There’s still no word on how the injuries occurred, so it’s impossible to tell if there’s a connection between the failure to have the rides inspected and the injuries.  Additionally, another story indicates a park maintenance worker allegedly reported safety concerns to the state regulators, concerns that were not followed up on.

Son of Beast, King’s Island’s $30 million-plus nightmare of a ride, has had a fairly varied existence.  It opened as a record-breaking wooden coaster, and the first modern one to have a loop.  It was widely disliked by enthusiasts and by much of the general public, and then in 2006 a timber on it broke, resulting in injuries to 28 riders.  In the following off-season, the loop was removed — the loop was not the cause of the accident, but its removal made lighter trains feasible, causing less stress on the structure.  And then the ride was shut down again in June of 2009 for unspecified reasons.

According to a recent interview with the park’s manager, it’s unlikely to reopen soon.  The manager, interestingly, says that many people are comfortable with the ride, but that he’s not, and that is evidently enough to prevent its reopening.

I’m on vacation this week, so I’m not going to post a lot, but I thought this case out of South Carolina was worth noting.  In brief, obnoxious kids acted as obnoxious kids do — boasting about their plans to bump go-karts while in line, and then, after another patron told them they better not bump him, doing exactly that, multiple times, causing injuries.

The suit, though, isn’t against them and their shallow pockets, but instead is against the amusement park, Family Kingdom.  The negligence suit was based on the fact that the employees (at least for summary judgment purposes) didn’t follow their policies that required that the race be shut down if there were either more than two warnings against bumping or a bump that resulted in a go-kart spinning 180 degrees.

The trial court granted a directed verdict at the close of the plaintiff’s evidence.  The appeals court reversed, finding the existence of a duty (based on a state amusement safety statute) and factual issues as to the remaining elements (breach, proximate cause, and comparative fault).

Dogpatch USA, a Lil’ Abner-themed park in Arkansas, closed in 1993 (you can see some recent pictures at Underground Ozarks; nothing like an abandoned theme park to make you think about Scooby Doo).  My family is from Arkansas and I remember driving by the park frequently, always wishing we could stop and go to it.  A pretty exhaustive history, including a discussion of a couple of tort suits brought while the park was open, can be found here.

Twelve years after the park closed, a teenager was injured while riding an ATV on the property; his parents sued and won over $500,000.  The outcome of the collection process is addressed, somewhat confusingly, in this local TV story.

A story archived on this message board indicates that the teenager hit a steel cable run between two trees.  I assume that the suit was brought based on the attractive nuisance doctrine, but that’s just a guess.

Keep in mind the usual caveats about allegations by former employees, but it’s an interesting story nonetheless, and is getting attention in particular due to the death at Sea World.