Big Boulder/Peak Resorts loose $2.5m lawsuit

[BenedictGomez]

We can predict what will happen in the future, based upon what has happened in the past.

Not when n=3 with only 1 season of data you cant.

 

[Newpylong]

What are the specific characteristics of the terrain that caused the deaths? If you are going to place blame, you need to be specific.



Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

He has no idea what he is talking about.

 

[180]

Are we really discussing this again. All 3 were males under 35 going way too fast. The demographic of most skier deaths. 2 had extremely old equipment, one of them was even doing a "retro" day on his grandfathers skis. Were the trails intermediate, clearly not. And that has been fixed. Were they icy? Yup. Given a more normal ski year, you will see the snowmaking depths on those trails groomed to take away the pitch. Will they address the entrance to Wayout, yes, eventually.

 

[FBGM]

He has no idea what he is talking about.

I know enough and have seen fatal ski cases been brought to court and won over less. I have been first hand part of more ridicules cares that have paid out/settled then the original Jerry vs Snowgun as mention in OP. Don’t have time or care enough to figure out if any of the Huntah bro deaths on new terrain are in court but all I’m saying is they have a more then fair chance if ended up there.

Back of your ticket flapping in yo face means poop emoji.

We live in life of sue happy morons. I saw a case of a lady that stepped in a pothole while charging her boots in parking lot and won.

Euro Land skiing has it good. Your dumb and die and that’s it. Your dumb and dead. End of story. Not so much here in good ol’ Trump USA.

 

[deadheadskier]

Yes, ski areas get sued all the time for injuries and fatalities. How often do those lawsuits lead to redesigns?

Again, what specific trail changes do you think Hunter should complete?

How experienced are you skiing this new terrain? If there are problems with it, one would think you could point directly to what needs to change.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[GregoryIsaacs]

I wonder how many people have sued Mount Washington for its unsafe conditions. Hope it wont lead to them re-grading tucks!

 

[drjeff]

I just hope that this litigious society we're currently living in, where if any goes wrong it has to be someone else's fault since apparently nobody ever does anything wrong themselves these days, doesn't keep going further and further? What's next? Let's sue the operator of the snowcat who groomed the slope the night before? Or maybe sue the manufacturer of the snowmaking equipment since it didn't produce "perfect" snow all the time? Or maybe get a class action suit going against everyone who skied that trail that entire day before an injury happened since they "obviously" detrimentally altered the condition of the slope prior to an accident happening.....

As the first line of most every waiver that is on the back of a lift ticket or on the sheets we sign if we buy a pass states "Skiing is an inherently dangerous sport...."

 

[Not Sure]

I wonder how many people have sued Mount Washington for its unsafe conditions. Hope it wont lead to them re-grading tucks!

https://www.lehighvalleylive.com/ne...tes-most-challenging-yet-rewarding-hikes.html

Don't even speculate !!!!!! Stupid unprepared hikers screw things up for everyone . Hope this doesn't become a precedent .

 

[catskillman]

Hopefully someone sues Hunter next for the incompetent trail designs and dangers that led to deaths.

Already in progress

 

[machski]

https://www.lehighvalleylive.com/ne...tes-most-challenging-yet-rewarding-hikes.html

Don't even speculate !!!!!! Stupid unprepared hikers screw things up for everyone . Hope this doesn't become a precedent .

From a skiing perspective, how one could sure for Tucks is beyond me. No lifts, no infrastructure and no grooming or maintenance (it's Backcountry!). Granted, there is volunteer patrol but they do not actively mitigate avalanche activity like an actual resort patrol would. But like has been mentioned, a good lawyer and more importantly the right Jury (everyone in US sees lawsuits as winning Powerball, right?) and anything can go.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[Edd]

From a skiing perspective, how one could sure for Tucks is beyond me. No lifts, no infrastructure and no grooming or maintenance (it's Backcountry!)[/URL]

Also constant warnings on Instagram that you could die out there.

 

[ThinkSnow]

From a skiing perspective, how one could sure for Tucks is beyond me. No lifts, no infrastructure and no grooming or maintenance (it's Backcountry!). Granted, there is volunteer patrol but they do not actively mitigate avalanche activity like an actual resort patrol would. But like has been mentioned, a good lawyer and more importantly the right Jury (everyone in US sees lawsuits as winning Powerball, right?) and anything can go.

"Pursuant to RSA 206:26-bb I, Any person determined by the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department to have acted negligently and requiring a search and rescue response by the Department shall be liable to the Department for the reasonable cost of the Department's expenses for such search and rescue response."

 

[FBGM]

Also constant warnings on Instagram that you could die out there.

In a court of law I usually bring up Instagram posts all the time. Nothing says good information and rule of law like Instagram.

 

[Edd]

In a court of law I usually bring up Instagram posts all the time. Nothing says good information and rule of law like Instagram.

Find yourself in court often, do you?

 

[puckoach]

So maybe offer limited Tort tickets at a discount? Basically waive your right to sue just like auto insurance?

Most likely a statute would have to pass thru legislation process to be effective in each state. Wisconsin has effective rulings on exactly this. Pay more to not waive rights. But, if going thru legislation, maybe just target " responsible if you participate. "

 

[HowieT2]

What's wrong with our legal system is that people form opinions about it without knowing what it is they're talking about. Like this case. Fairly unusual situation. The jury found for the plaintiff because he crashed into a snow making machine that was on a trail that was supposed to be closed but hadnt been marked as such. Ski resorts have formidable immunity from lawsuits for incidents caused by terrain and any risk inherent in the sport. This case is an outlier where the risk was not assumed by the skier, because it was not inherent and there was no notification to be aware of it. Furthermore, the amount of the award by the jury is subject to the review of the trial judge and beyond that an appellate court. If it is too high, it's likely to be adjusted accordingly.

Ashmen, who injured his leg in 2015 at the resort in Lake Harmony, Pennsylvania, said in his 2017 complaint that he was snowboarding with friends for the weekend and went down the resort's “Snowdrift” trail, which “appeared in every way to be open to patrons.”

He claimed that while going down the hill, he suddenly came upon an idle snow-making machine and tried to swerve around it. He failed and struck the machine “severely” with his leg, according to the complaint. He fractured his lower leg, which required corrective surgery, bruised his hips and injured his head and back, according to the complaint, and as a result continues to suffer physically and emotionally.

Read more at: https://www.law360.com/articles/116...-5m-verdict-for-snowboarder-s-injury?copied=1

 

[180]

Good to have all the facts!

What's wrong with our legal system is that people form opinions about it without knowing what it is they're talking about. Like this case. Fairly unusual situation. The jury found for the plaintiff because he crashed into a snow making machine that was on a trail that was supposed to be closed but hadnt been marked as such. Ski resorts have formidable immunity from lawsuits for incidents caused by terrain and any risk inherent in the sport. This case is an outlier where the risk was not assumed by the skier, because it was not inherent and there was no notification to be aware of it. Furthermore, the amount of the award by the jury is subject to the review of the trial judge and beyond that an appellate court. If it is too high, it's likely to be adjusted accordingly.

Ashmen, who injured his leg in 2015 at the resort in Lake Harmony, Pennsylvania, said in his 2017 complaint that he was snowboarding with friends for the weekend and went down the resort's “Snowdrift” trail, which “appeared in every way to be open to patrons.”

He claimed that while going down the hill, he suddenly came upon an idle snow-making machine and tried to swerve around it. He failed and struck the machine “severely” with his leg, according to the complaint. He fractured his lower leg, which required corrective surgery, bruised his hips and injured his head and back, according to the complaint, and as a result continues to suffer physically and emotionally.

Read more at: https://www.law360.com/articles/116...-5m-verdict-for-snowboarder-s-injury?copied=1