Two professional boxers were engaged in a championship match. At the end of the third round, the bell rang, signaling the boxers to return to their corners. One boxer, frustrated with his performance, walked over to his opponent, who had his back turned, and punched him in the back of the head, causing a serious injury. The injured boxer sued the other for battery.
Will the injured boxer likely prevail?
Yes, because boxing is an abnormally dangerous activity for which there is strict liability.
No, because by agreeing to participate in a boxing match, the injured boxer consented to any and all contact from his opponent.
Yes, because the punch occurred after the bell rang, it was outside the scope of the consent given by participating in the match.
No, unless the boxer who threw the punch intended to cause the specific, serious injury that resulted.
Yes, the injured boxer will likely prevail. While participants in a sporting event consent to contact inherent in the sport, that consent is limited to conduct permitted by the rules and reasonably foreseeable in the game. Intentionally striking an opponent after the bell has rung is outside the rules of boxing and thus exceeds the scope of any implied consent given by participating in the match. Therefore, the punch constitutes a battery.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is the legal definition of battery in this context?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What does 'inherent risks' of a sport mean?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What does it mean for conduct to be 'egregious' in the context of sports?