Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review Volume 27 Number 1 Article 1 9-1-2006 Back on Track: How the California Supreme Court Got It Wrong, and What Legislature Can Do to Fix It Jeffrey S. Goodfried Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/elr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Jeffrey S. Goodfried, Back on Track: How the California Supreme Court Got It Wrong, and What Legislature Can Do to Fix It, 27 Loy. L.A. Ent. L. Rev. 1 (2006). Available at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/elr/vol27/iss1/1 This Notes and Comments is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact
[email protected]. BACK ON TRACK: HOW THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT GOT IT WRONG, AND WHAT LEGISLATURE CAN DO TO FIX IT I. ALL ABOARD - INTRODUCTION According to the California Supreme Court, operators of roller coasters and similar amusement park rides should be held to the same safety standards that apply to buses, planes, and other modes of public transportation.' The court's dubious 4-3 decision in Gomez v. Disney means that when a lower court adjudicates negligence claims against an amusement park, it will have to hold thrill rides to an utmost safety standard, rather than the reasonable care standard, which would likely be extraordinary diligence.2 On first impression, one might find little difference between utmost care and extraordinarydiligence.