• Contributory Negligence v Comparative Negligence.
  
• Comp. Negligence: Even if you are a little negligent you can still sue/win.
  
• Cont. Negligence: Plaintiff has to have no negligence to win.
• Negligence is not applicable in this case due to the waiver. Can only sue Neptune due to recklessness. No such thing as contributory recklessness, it will take more than that in order to defend case. Nuggets.
  
• A number of crucial words: Reasonableness v Recklessness. Reasonable has to rise to Reckless. Don't misuse terms. Experts never use the term "reckless" (Bailey Johnson may have used term in diving article).
  
• Case law may be applicable during trial. Good way to score points.
• Proximate Cause: Not a matter of "Def was reckless and Plaint got hurt"; hes to be tied together. What is the cause to the injury? Did the dive team cause the death of Lee Allen? 
• Don't be confused with the "corporation & people". Case law states that it is reasonable to expect that if one person in the company knows something, everyone does.
  
• On expert costs a whole lot more than the others ($900.00 an hour). Jordan Nelson. Capitalize on that.
  

Case Law

• How is recklessness defined?
  
• Hopson v Dawson: taking risky action is better than taking no action at all. 
• Was Rogers sending Allen ahead a better idea than doing nothing at all.
  
• Wallace v DeVeas: Individuals having superior skill or knowledge are required to conduct themselves consistent with such superior capacity.
• Has to do with what standard Neptune followed. (Buddy system, etc.) 
• Gilbertson v Everest Experience: Just because Neptune doesn't follow "industry standards" doesn't mean that their standards were followed out with a reckless disregard for the safety of others. 
  

Expert Issues: 

• River Tran & Quincy Montgomery.
  
• Both may have issues with expertise.
  

Use statutes and facts in opening. Don't cite cases. Case law is important for objection arguments. Helps back up a point if challenged.