(plaintiff brought personal injury action against defendant after defendant’s horse kicked plaintiff; defendant recently adopted horse from local shelter and horse was gelded prior to adoption; plaintiff was hired by defendant to feed horse and clean out stall where horse was boarded; plaintiff was taking horse out to paddock when injury occurred; defendant filed motion for summary judgment claiming equine act provided immunity; district court granted motion, and plaintiff appealed raising several issues; appellate court affirmed summary judgment after responding to all of plaintiff’s issues; specifically, court held immunity statute applies to all “participants” and limited liability not limited to tourist or recreation; plaintiff was independent contractor subject to equine act and not employee because she advertised her own business and controlled when and how to do her job; plaintiff held herself out as qualified to assist in caring for animals, so defendant not required to do searching inquiry of her abilities under Act; horse had been well-behaved on all prior instances, so failure to disclose that horse was rescued or had recently been gelded did not create fact question; and plaintiff failed to argue that required posting under Act had been complied with, so issue was waived).