Free Newsletters
Most Popular
- Wage and Hour Claims Among Top Threats to U.S. Employers
- Liberty Mutual Appoints Northeast Division VP for Commercial Insurance
- N.Y. Assemblyman Takes Aim at Anti-Concurrent Causation Clauses
- Price Stability on the Horizon for Lawyers E&O Class
- Maine Legislature Votes Down Vacant Property Insurance Bill
- 50 Top Apps for Independent Agents
- Montana Man Deliberately Crashes Into Insurance Office
- Cyber Attacks On Banks More Serious Than Public Realizes
- 10 Things to Know About the Trucking Industry
- Wage and Hour Claims Among Top Threats to U.S. Employers
- GOP Questions Fundraising for ObamacareMay 21, 2013 | Comments (48)
- Montana Man Deliberately Crashes Into Insurance OfficeMay 17, 2013 | Comments (14)
- Wage and Hour Claims Among Top Threats to U.S. EmployersMay 21, 2013 | Comments (7)
- Cyber Attacks On Banks More Serious Than Public RealizesMay 20, 2013 | Comments (5)
- ‘Major Disaster’ Declared in Wake of Deadly Oklahoma TornadoesMay 21, 2013 | Comments (5)
Current Issue
Partner Center
Editors and Contributors
-
Andrea WellsAgency Compensation Playbook: 2013 Agency Salary Survey -
Andrew G. SimpsonHow Process Improvement Drives Agency Profitability -
Stephanie JonesThe Acquisition Cycle -
Don JerglerIndustry Predictions -
Chris BurandReasonable Compensation -
Andrea WellsPersonal Lines: How Technology is Changing the Way Agents Do Business

Cyber Attacks On Banks More Serious Than Public Realizes
Risk Retention Groups Show Strong Financial Stability: Demotech
Washington Man Gets $1,103 Speeding Ticket in Oregon
The Time is Now for Agent Licensing Reform
Montana Enacts Insurance Compact Legislation
Bill Limits California Workers’ Comp for Pro Athletes
Sandy Changing the Way Underwriters View Northeast
TRIA Debate Heats Up with Charge ‘Nervous Nelly’ P/C Insurers Enjoy $7B ‘Subsidy’



“Officials for the resort company deny any responsibility. The young woman, Andrea Ramos, was on her day off skiing on personal time and did not actually work for Heavenly, they said.”
Well, if she didn’t work for Heavenly, how the heck would they know if she was on her day off?? Or is this just a bad excerpted statement which should have finished “…and did not actually work for Heavenly as an instructor”.
The mountain should have NO responsibility here – if she wasn’t acting in a capacity as a professional, then her activity was no different than any other skiier or rider that day. Personal time is still personal time.
As for being “trained”, the mountain isn’t about to teach all the lifties and foodies how to ski or ride. At our place, while the Internationals are given free passes and food vouchers, they’re not taught how to ski or ride. Just like they’re not taught how to train a water buffalo to dance backwards. Which in some cases is much easier.
I imagine it was much easier for the injured parties to grab the offenders and blame the hill. Had it been a guest from the Transylvanian Alps, would they have chased the offenders overseas?
Totally ridiculous waste of defense dollars.
Aren’t ALL skiers supposed to be aware of their surroundings? If both parties are moving at the time of the accident, aren’t they BOTH at fault? After all, Elly was moving, too. Also, perhaps Elly is too old to ski, or at least perform competently on the mountain? There is no way a 50+ year old can claim to have the physical capabilities to ski with a younger person, who obviously has better (or at least, less debilitated) coordination and reaction time. What will likely come of this is the resort cutting off access to old people, as this proves they cannot reaonably perform up to standards on a mountain. Perhaps there should be a performance test for each person over age 50? That way incompetent parties are kept off the mountain and out of harm’s way.
Mike. N. needs to grow up!
I am 54 and an expert skier. Your argument is obnoxious.
The arguments are generally; since the operator recognized a controllable hazard (they had patrol employees slowing skiers and boarders) did they perform adequately in attempting to manage that hazard, and, do they have any extra duty to manage the actions of off duty employees. The issue of not requiring liability insurance of expat employees is not supportable unles there is a specific law requiring it.
From a claims liability evaluation point, having two parties moving at the same time does not establish liability on either party. Only specific actions proximate to cause establish liability unless there is an established legal requirement on one or the other than it not met. Saying she was sorry after the event also does not establish liability.
I expect the employee issue will be irrelevant but the issue of the quality and duty of the patrol employee may be worth looking at.
The statement of “in effect, Heavenly itself crashed into Elly” is the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard! So if I work for McDonald’s and crash in to you, then McDonald’s is liable? People just want their money and will sue over anything these days. It’s sad when you can’t even ski without being worried about a lawsuit.