In a case article written by David Herbert, he discusses
a legal case between a Personal Fitness Trainer and his client. The issue with
this case was that the client initially sought services from a Personal
Trainer, who was recommended by a Physician, in order to stay fit and active. The
client had recently had back surgery, informing the Personal Trainer, where he
assured her that he was capable of training her in safe exercise activities. In
a workout consisting of burpees, jumping jacks, and deadlifting 75 pounds, she
was later injured. Eventually, she filed litigation claiming negligence against
the Personal Trainer for sustaining severe and permanent back injuries.
also filed litigation for not doing a proper fitness evaluation on the client before
devising an exercise routine; not performing a safe and proper exercise
routine; not considering the clients prior injuries or physical conditions and
much more. He was later charged with allegations by the health and fitness
facility, with the following: failing to follow internal rules, employee
manuals, and operating and training procedures; not providing the client with a
proper medical condition evaluation; encouraging his client to continue the
exercises, beyond her physical capabilities.
The trainer had a degree in health/wellness exercise
physiology; do to this, he was highly capable to assist his client in a good
manner. He was eventually certified as a Strength and Conditioning specialist
by the National Strength and Conditioning Association. His certificate later
expired a little bit before he started training his client. Therefore, he felt
as if he did not have to get a new certification and thought he could train
someone without it. Also, as being certified in the past, he knew that he was
responsible to get each client’s medical questionnaire. He failed to do this
with the client who had a past back surgery; he felt as he knew this clients
body inside and out, considering he knew her for over a year and a half.
This case could have been prevented by if the trainer would
have had the client fill out a medical condition evaluation form. If she would have
filled this form out, he would have known about the back condition and how
serious it was. He could have prevented the injuries and help strengthen her
body instead of causing more injuries and back pain. He also should have got
his Strength and Conditioning certificated renewed. This could have prevented
less of a problem when it came to the health and fitness facility as well.
plaintiff charged the Personal trainer with a total of 1.4 million, which
consisted of one million for pain and suffering in the future and 400,000 for
past pain and suffering. After the case, the verdict was dropped down to
980,000 do the jury stating the client was 30% at fault.
three types of tort include: misfeasance, malfeasance, and nonfeasance. Misfeasance
is a management of a business, public office or other responsibility, where
there are some errors and mistakes, but do not violate any of the laws. Malfeasance
is 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. Nonfeasance
is the neglecting of some act that should have been performed.