Vail Resorts Faces 2 Lawsuits Over Snowboarding Employees Hitting Skiers - Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums
SnowboardingForum.com is the premier Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-12-2012, 04:19 PM   #1 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
AcroPhile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Denver
Posts: 922
Default Vail Resorts Faces 2 Lawsuits Over Snowboarding Employees Hitting Skiers

I saw this article in the Summit Daily News today about Vail getting sued two times over snowboarding employees crashing into and injuring skiers. The article: Vail Resorts faces 2nd lawsuit over ski accidents | SummitDaily.com, This whole thing is ridiculous. For once, I am siding with Vail Resorts on this one. The lawsuit alleges that Vail didn't train or insure the employees. WTF? Train for what???? The insurance thing makes no sense either.None of the other guests at the resort are required to have any insurance. No part of their jobs involves snowboarding and they were enjoying the resort as normal guests on their days off. How on earth is Vail liable for any of its employees that are not on the clock? This seems like some pretty frivolous litigation to me.
AcroPhile is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 03-12-2012, 06:48 PM   #2 (permalink)
With extra cheese.
 
CheeseForSteeze's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,750
Default

Doesn't owning a lift pass or ticket relinquish you of the ability to sue for such things. I am looking at the back of my 7 Springs ticket and it specifically says purchasing it releases your right to hold the mountain liable for (laundry list of risks) one of which is "negligence of Seven Springs employees or agents", indemnify, hold harmless and reimburse them for all losses from any claims associated with such risks.

I'd have to imagine most resorts use similar boilerplate that would include a clause similar to that.
CheeseForSteeze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 06:53 PM   #3 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 58
Default

Most resorts have agreements in which you waive their liability even in the case of negligence. As of all User Agreements, whether it stands up in court depends on how good the lawyer and how bad the damage.
JamesX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 08:06 PM   #4 (permalink)
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Vail, CO
Posts: 3,722
Default

Sounds pretty frivolous to me too.
Argo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 08:39 PM   #5 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 15
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CheeseForSteeze View Post
Doesn't owning a lift pass or ticket relinquish you of the ability to sue for such things. I am looking at the back of my 7 Springs ticket and it specifically says purchasing it releases your right to hold the mountain liable for (laundry list of risks) one of which is "negligence of Seven Springs employees or agents", indemnify, hold harmless and reimburse them for all losses from any claims associated with such risks.

I'd have to imagine most resorts use similar boilerplate that would include a clause similar to that.
These agreements don't hold up in court if the resort is proven to be negligent. Meaning, if Vail paid off duty employees to go around taking out skiers, you could still sue the crap out of them regardless of what rights you waived by buying a lift ticket.

Obviously, that's not what happened (cool idea to drum up business on off peak days though) but that's similar to the case the lawyers will be making against Vail -- they were negligent for whatever reason.

Sounds like a bunch of crap to me.
smboarder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 09:34 PM   #6 (permalink)
Member
 
Khao's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Gold Coast, Australia.
Posts: 33
Default

It won't get far at all. They did not act on behalf of the mountain nor are they vicariously liable when they're not working. Stupid case and sadly, it's the most common type. Uneducated people these days think you can sue for anything that hurts you haha.
Khao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 10:26 PM   #7 (permalink)
With extra cheese.
 
CheeseForSteeze's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,750
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by smboarder View Post
These agreements don't hold up in court if the resort is proven to be negligent. Meaning, if Vail paid off duty employees to go around taking out skiers, you could still sue the crap out of them regardless of what rights you waived by buying a lift ticket.

Obviously, that's not what happened (cool idea to drum up business on off peak days though) but that's similar to the case the lawyers will be making against Vail -- they were negligent for whatever reason.

Sounds like a bunch of crap to me.
But wouldn't the case you hypothesized be considered somethinng other than negligence since there is an element of intent? I thought negligence, by it's very definition in the parlance of lawyers, meant an absence of intent. Any ideas?
CheeseForSteeze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2012, 01:36 AM   #8 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 58
Default

There is negligence then there is gross negligence. I think Smboarder is using Criminal negligence as example.

For example, if the lawyer manage to prove (or scare the resort enough to settle) that resort have a habit of encouraging the employees to push the safety limit (e.g. be reckless) to make the resort more appealing to thrill seekers then the lawyer can try to push for gross negligence.

The suite seems pretty frivolous, but if it gets to trial who knows what happens. Jury in the United States is often worse than Russian roulette.
JamesX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2012, 04:45 AM   #9 (permalink)
Resident poet
 
wrathfuldeity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Bham
Posts: 3,855
Default

So if it gets to a jury, then jury selection is the important factor...hopefully the resort can get a seasoned boarder empannelled.
__________________
wrathfuldeity is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2012, 09:07 AM   #10 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 206
Default

Anybody get the feeling that both those people that got injured were gapers. Seriously though I can see both sides of this but there is an inherent danger you take when you get on the slopes. Its just like biking on a heavy traffic area.
jdmccright is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:20 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
VerticalSports
Baseball Forum Golf Forum Boxing Forum Snowmobile Forum
Basketball Forum Soccer Forum MMA Forum PWC Forum
Football Forum Cricket Forum Wrestling Forum ATV Forum
Hockey Forum Volleyball Forum Paintball Forum Snowboarding Forum
Tennis Forum Rugby Forums Lacrosse Forum Skiing Forums