Was the snowboarder wearing a helmet? Was he showboating? Most 18 year olds think they’re invincible (we all did). Snowboarding is dangerous; especially if you’re not proficient at it (which is why most skiers don’t like them on the same run) and the risk is solely your own. How is a SKI resort responsible? Ironically, the waiver was undoubtedly drawn up/approved by lawyers.
I have worked on and off slope for about 15 years and at our family hill, there are two slopes for riders; one is deliberately for early riders of any age and the other is set up for more advanced riders. To get onto the advanced trail the snowboarder has to take an online ‘quiz’, pay an extra fee, and have a special tag to get into the bigger field. Everyone wears helmets or they get chased out.
On the ‘cruiser’ trail, though, it’s open access and anyone with a valid lift ticket can go into it. The helmet ratio is WAY up over five years ago, but it doesn’t mean everyone should be there either.
While there is an assumption of liability on the part of the enthusiast, the hill does bear an increases responsibility especially if they have built the fun boxes, rails etc and groomed them for the day’s riding. It requires contant supervision to make sure that the conditions are ideal and safe, and when too much snow build up or gets scraped off, the feature should be closed and brought back only when ready and approved.
Just like a beginner shouldn’t be out on a well-maintained mogul field. Yet I’ve seen plenty of skiers well over their competency level trying to play with the bumps when they can barely turn.
“How else am I going to learn how to do them” seems to be the normal response when they get bucketed down.
Another stupid ruling that will only enrich the lawyers while costing everyone else more for their lift tickets. The waiver was no good because the snowboarder could not “negotiate better terms”??? Really? How about these terms: Stay the $%^& off the mountain if you’re a money grubbing a-hole who will sue when you get hurt doing something you KNOW can get you hurt! Disgusting.
I confess to being an adrenaline junkie. Too old, but don’t care. If I get hurt, so be it. I race go karts, ski downhill as fast as possible, surf, etc. I do not expect any ski resort or kart track to pay. I have been hurt and never considered a suit. I hope no attorney reads this or they will contact me. In my eyes, this is assumption of risk. We will pay for this in our lift tickets which are already getting too pricey.
One assumes the risk of participation in a potentially dangerous activity. One does not assume the risk for the negligence of others. If the slope was improperly maintained or hazards not marked, the resort owner can be sued for negligence. The waiver is intended to prevent lawsuits by people who injure themselves due to reasons other than the negligence or intentional acts of the resort, such as simply falling and breaking a leg. When I read the article I don’t recall that it specified the particular cause of the the plaintiff’s injuries.
That’s the biggest issue in my view too, Darren. Unless there’s evidence to support the owner’s of that location failed to properly maintain the course and/or were negligent in some way (not just “the rider fell while snowboarding and hurt himself”), the rider has no ground to stand on in this case.
At least that’s my arm-chair attorney stance based on the limited information given in this article.
Agreed. All the court said was go back and look at the facts of this case. Just because skiing is a high risk sport does not mean a ski resort is not responsible for safely constructing jumps. There was a medium sized jump where I skied last year that had a turn directly after that you could not see on approach. I wiped out and slid off of the course onto hard packed ice. I was fine, but if there was a serious injury, I could see how the resort would be held at least partially responsible.
Since when has anyone thought a liability waiver was a bar to a claim for negligence?
Was the snowboarder wearing a helmet? Was he showboating? Most 18 year olds think they’re invincible (we all did). Snowboarding is dangerous; especially if you’re not proficient at it (which is why most skiers don’t like them on the same run) and the risk is solely your own. How is a SKI resort responsible? Ironically, the waiver was undoubtedly drawn up/approved by lawyers.
I have worked on and off slope for about 15 years and at our family hill, there are two slopes for riders; one is deliberately for early riders of any age and the other is set up for more advanced riders. To get onto the advanced trail the snowboarder has to take an online ‘quiz’, pay an extra fee, and have a special tag to get into the bigger field. Everyone wears helmets or they get chased out.
On the ‘cruiser’ trail, though, it’s open access and anyone with a valid lift ticket can go into it. The helmet ratio is WAY up over five years ago, but it doesn’t mean everyone should be there either.
While there is an assumption of liability on the part of the enthusiast, the hill does bear an increases responsibility especially if they have built the fun boxes, rails etc and groomed them for the day’s riding. It requires contant supervision to make sure that the conditions are ideal and safe, and when too much snow build up or gets scraped off, the feature should be closed and brought back only when ready and approved.
Just like a beginner shouldn’t be out on a well-maintained mogul field. Yet I’ve seen plenty of skiers well over their competency level trying to play with the bumps when they can barely turn.
“How else am I going to learn how to do them” seems to be the normal response when they get bucketed down.
Another stupid ruling that will only enrich the lawyers while costing everyone else more for their lift tickets. The waiver was no good because the snowboarder could not “negotiate better terms”??? Really? How about these terms: Stay the $%^& off the mountain if you’re a money grubbing a-hole who will sue when you get hurt doing something you KNOW can get you hurt! Disgusting.
I confess to being an adrenaline junkie. Too old, but don’t care. If I get hurt, so be it. I race go karts, ski downhill as fast as possible, surf, etc. I do not expect any ski resort or kart track to pay. I have been hurt and never considered a suit. I hope no attorney reads this or they will contact me. In my eyes, this is assumption of risk. We will pay for this in our lift tickets which are already getting too pricey.
Great comment. I certainly hope the “entitlement” crowd is in the minority.
One assumes the risk of participation in a potentially dangerous activity. One does not assume the risk for the negligence of others. If the slope was improperly maintained or hazards not marked, the resort owner can be sued for negligence. The waiver is intended to prevent lawsuits by people who injure themselves due to reasons other than the negligence or intentional acts of the resort, such as simply falling and breaking a leg. When I read the article I don’t recall that it specified the particular cause of the the plaintiff’s injuries.
That’s the biggest issue in my view too, Darren. Unless there’s evidence to support the owner’s of that location failed to properly maintain the course and/or were negligent in some way (not just “the rider fell while snowboarding and hurt himself”), the rider has no ground to stand on in this case.
At least that’s my arm-chair attorney stance based on the limited information given in this article.
Agreed. All the court said was go back and look at the facts of this case. Just because skiing is a high risk sport does not mean a ski resort is not responsible for safely constructing jumps. There was a medium sized jump where I skied last year that had a turn directly after that you could not see on approach. I wiped out and slid off of the course onto hard packed ice. I was fine, but if there was a serious injury, I could see how the resort would be held at least partially responsible.