Sponsorship does not equal control.

The plaintiff attempted to sue Reebok under a theory of premises liability and negligent selection of premises theories for an alleged dangerous condition that caused her to fall down an embankment after a beach party in Mexico. The plaintiff was selected by the defendant as a winner of an all-expense-paid vacation/promotion at a resort in Mexico. The plaintiff argued that, because the vacation was sponsored and paid for by Reebok, Reebok had control over the vacation premises and had a duty to “be familiar” with the potential hazardous conditions on the grounds. The court disagreed.

_{Case Law Alerts, 3rd Quarter, July 2020 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2020 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}