In a case article written by David Herbert, he discussesa legal case between a Personal Fitness Trainer and his client.
The issue withthis case was that the client initially sought services from a PersonalTrainer, who was recommended by a Physician, in order to stay fit and active. Theclient had recently had back surgery, informing the Personal Trainer, where heassured her that he was capable of training her in safe exercise activities. Ina workout consisting of burpees, jumping jacks, and deadlifting 75 pounds, shewas later injured. Eventually, she filed litigation claiming negligence againstthe Personal Trainer for sustaining severe and permanent back injuries. Shealso filed litigation for not doing a proper fitness evaluation on the client beforedevising an exercise routine; not performing a safe and proper exerciseroutine; not considering the clients prior injuries or physical conditions andmuch more. He was later charged with allegations by the health and fitnessfacility, with the following: failing to follow internal rules, employeemanuals, and operating and training procedures; not providing the client with aproper medical condition evaluation; encouraging his client to continue theexercises, beyond her physical capabilities. The trainer had a degree in health/wellness exercisephysiology; do to this, he was highly capable to assist his client in a goodmanner.
He was eventually certified as a Strength and Conditioning specialistby the National Strength and Conditioning Association. His certificate laterexpired a little bit before he started training his client. Therefore, he feltas if he did not have to get a new certification and thought he could trainsomeone without it. Also, as being certified in the past, he knew that he wasresponsible to get each client’s medical questionnaire. He failed to do thiswith the client who had a past back surgery; he felt as he knew this clientsbody inside and out, considering he knew her for over a year and a half. This case could have been prevented by if the trainer wouldhave had the client fill out a medical condition evaluation form. If she would havefilled this form out, he would have known about the back condition and howserious it was.
He could have prevented the injuries and help strengthen herbody instead of causing more injuries and back pain. He also should have gothis Strength and Conditioning certificated renewed. This could have preventedless of a problem when it came to the health and fitness facility as well. Theplaintiff charged the Personal trainer with a total of 1.4 million, whichconsisted of one million for pain and suffering in the future and 400,000 forpast pain and suffering. After the case, the verdict was dropped down to980,000 do the jury stating the client was 30% at fault. Thethree types of tort include: misfeasance, malfeasance, and nonfeasance.
Misfeasanceis a management of a business, public office or other responsibility, wherethere are some errors and mistakes, but do not violate any of the laws. Malfeasanceis the performance by a public official of an act that is legally unjustified,harmful, or contrary to law; an act of violation of public trust. Nonfeasanceis the neglecting of some act that should have been performed.