Loon Ski Instructor Sues Another Skier: You be the Jury.

[riverc0il]

not only was she found 95% responsible for the crash, but she apparently has absolutely no faith in the court system which is amazing considering the substantial finding against her:

Walker voiced disbelief that jurors found her 95 percent responsible. ''I don't think it was fair," she said.

:roll:

 

[bigbog]

.........

Hey, the verdict is good to hear...
You shouldn't carry accessive speed in an area occupied by a potential entering party. It's not unlike passing in the slow lane close to a merging lane or on-ramp.

my $.01...

 

[dmc]

Re: .........

Hey, the verdict is good to hear...
You shouldn't carry accessive speed in an area occupied by a potential entering party. It's not unlike passing in the slow lane close to a merging lane or on-ramp.

my $.01...

Was there a "slow skiing" sign or was it a slow skiing zone? I didnt see that in the article...

I did read that it was an expert trail where it's OK to ski fast..

Also you use the word merge... Who has to merge in your scenerio? The guy going fast in the highway or the guy entering the highway on the on-ramp?

And in this day in age - where beginners and intermediates dart around expert terrain like they belong there... Where are you totally safe from "potential entering party"??

 

[Lostone]

:-? Not sure what you're not getting about this, but I'll only try it one more time then... :roll:

You can't ski or ride looking up. Therefore they have set the rules saying that the rider uphill has responsibility for avoiding a collision.

You can go as fast as you want and take as much air as you want, but you are not allowed to hit or endanger those below you. They can be experts. They can be beginners. They can be lying on the ground, trying to get up from a fall.

It is your responsibility to maintain enough control so as not to hit or endanger them. They are not cutting into your line. You have no line. You have the responsibility to not hit or endanger those below you.

 

[dmc]

:-? Not sure what you're not getting about this, but I'll only try it one more time then... :roll:

You can't ski or ride looking up. Therefore they have set the rules saying that the rider uphill has responsibility for avoiding a collision.

You can go as fast as you want and take as much air as you want, but you are not allowed to hit or endanger those below you. They can be experts. They can be beginners. They can be lying on the ground, trying to get up from a fall.

It is your responsibility to maintain enough control so as not to hit or endanger them. They are not cutting into your line. You have no line. You have the responsibility to not hit or endanger those below you.

I think it it YOU that does not get it - mso don't get all "eye rolly" on me...

Along with looking out for the downhill skier that is actually moving downhill...

It is the downhill skiers responsibility to look up when entering or starting out on a trail...
It is the downhill skiers responsibility to NOT stop where they can not be seen by an uphill skier...

It says so in the code... check yourself...

the code also states
"Always stay in control, and be able to stop or avoid other people or objects. "

If a beginner is on an expert trail - they have violated that part of the code.. Because they can't control themselves enough to stop or avoid others... And thats THE number one item on the list...

 

[BeanoNYC]

1) She's the instructor and should know the mountain. I'm sure she's come down that run many times and have seen people crossing in her path before.
2) As an Instructor and Expert skiier, she should assume the risk that she will get hurt some time. I'm sorry she's scarred up, but that's the breaks.
3) No offense to Boston ('cept for the Sox), but that city is not the Fashion and Modeling capitol of the world. If she really had a promising career in Modeling she would have signed with a company in NYC, LA, Milan or Paris.....and you better believe they would advise her to stop instructing.

I side with the little girl and her parents. I do hope they countersue. This is Frivolous.

I do agree with DMC about the downhill skiiers responsibility as well. But to sue over something as common as a merger collision is Nuts (N.V.T.S. Nuts!)

 

[Vortex]

DMC, I never heard anything about this. I am probably Loon's most frequent skier who post here or at least in the top few. I would like to know where this happened. Loon does have alot of signs up to control speed and does have ambassadors at trail junctions at busy times trying to control speed and crowds. If it was in the park... then it opens alot of other questions. Being a resort employee... would it not lend one to use more caution? I would hope. :idea: I need more info to make a decsion on fault.

 

[Rushski]

Haven't been to Loon in quite a few years, but I can always remember pretty sizable crowds. Even with their limitted ticket sales (if they still do that).
Also, not happy that someone told me they had really widened Rumrunner unlike how it used to be.

With that, I find it very irresponsible for an employee of said mountain airing it out with no consequence of what's below her. Don't think it looks good for the mountain's reputation. I love to catch a little air off a lip like anyone else, but only when I'm pretty damn sure of what is below me.

Though somehow, as I have gotten older I am way more cautious than I used to be. When merging trails I always look up and over, starting out on a trail I do the same. And, of course always watch the skiers/boarders below me, kind of like driving. Usually can pick out the accidents waiting to happen...

 

[dmc]

I need more info to make a decsion on fault.

The voice of reason in the wilderness...

 

[tirolerpeter]

Liability

Haven't been to Loon in quite a few years, but I can always remember pretty sizable crowds. Even with their limitted ticket sales (if they still do that).
Also, not happy that someone told me they had really widened Rumrunner unlike how it used to be.

With that, I find it very irresponsible for an employee of said mountain airing it out with no consequence of what's below her. Don't think it looks good for the mountain's reputation. I love to catch a little air off a lip like anyone else, but only when I'm pretty damn sure of what is below me.

Though somehow, as I have gotten older I am way more cautious than I used to be. When merging trails I always look up and over, starting out on a trail I do the same. And, of course always watch the skiers/boarders below me, kind of like driving. Usually can pick out the accidents waiting to happen...

Rushski has said it all. I agree.

 

[dmc]

When merging trails I always look up and over, starting out on a trail I do the same. And, of course always watch the skiers/boarders below me, kind of like driving. Usually can pick out the accidents waiting to happen...

ya... Me too... Goes without saying...

But IT DOES NOT absolve the downhill skiers of the responsibility of having to yield to the up hill skier when starting out on or entering a trail...

 

[Rushski]

When merging trails I always look up and over, starting out on a trail I do the same. And, of course always watch the skiers/boarders below me, kind of like driving. Usually can pick out the accidents waiting to happen...

ya... Me too... Goes without saying...

But IT DOES NOT absolve the downhill skiers of the responsibility of having to yield to the up hill skier when starting out on or entering a trail...

That's the point I was making, that everyone is responsible to some extent, regardless of position on trail. If you look back on this post I had a similar incident and believe to this day the instructor in my case should NOT have had little beginner skiers traversing across the runoff of a dropoff. Even though it was lowly Nashoba, it did say "Experts Only" at the top.

 

[tirolerpeter]

Liability

It is unfortunate, but also a fact of life, that any number of "greens" cross any number of "blacks" on many mountains. There is often no practical way to create lower ability trails that go from top to bottom without such traverses. Killington has many such situations, as do most other mountains. While the skier crossing ANY trail must watch for and yield right of way, only a fool would use the inevitable "bump" to catch air without having a clear view of their path and their landing. I love to ski fast too. I love to catch air when I'm cruising fast. I also NEVER ASSUME that a landing is clear! For an INSTRUCTOR (?) to do otherwise is stupid, if not totally legally liable. Every couple of seasons Hunter Mt. develops some delightfully large "rolling bumps" that jusk beg you to fly? Does that mean you do it without a clear view or a spotter?

 

[dmc]

Re: Liability

Every couple of seasons Hunter Mt. develops some delightfully large "rolling bumps" that jusk beg you to fly? Does that mean you do it without a clear view or a spotter?

Depends...
If you know nobody is in front of you and you can get a view while up trail...

I don't see any problem with hitting those rollers without a spotter. I've never had a problem with it...

 

[tirolerpeter]

Liability

dmc..NEVER is and "absolute" Be careful of "absolutes."

 

[dmc]

Re: Liability

dmc..NEVER is and "absolute" Be careful of "absolutes."

I'm cool... Absolutely never had any problems hittin a downhill skier after a roller or kicker..

Ski and ride very agressive and defensive...

Still don't want to "cowtow" to beginners on expert trails... Ridiculous Killington beginner cattracks excluded..
I really believe that if this goes unchecked they(beginners/intermediates) will suck the fun out of skiing with lawsuits and incessent whining about the "code" and how they inturpuret it...

 

[bigbog]

I need more info to make a decsion on fault.

The voice of reason in the wilderness...

Before you ski the Alps on a day with low-hanging cloud cover shrouding the landscape below, you'd better think twice about taking on the "Because I can't see any danger, it must be all clear..." attitude and stepping up to Mach schnell speed long radius arcs. If you can't be positive about seeing the entire field of view, one should presume then that the field of view, at some point, is occupied. That's the point I was (somewhat unsuccessfully;-) trying to make....that's why the longtime rule..stated by Lostone has been adhered to. The more rules you pile on, the more chances uphill skiers will chance it...the fewer, the clearer. Sure one should look uphill, but while entering at 20mph??..or at 2mph. Which is easier to avoid by the uphill skier?

 

[noreaster]

Baltimore Orioles Cal Ripken Jr did not ski until after retirement. Cal's wife and kids skied all the time without Cal. Some people actually read the ski tickets where it says skiing is a dangerous sport and there is a high probability of carnage. So is playing 3rd base but the money is a lot better than a ski instructor's salary.

 

[dmc]

Before you ski the Alps on a day with low-hanging cloud cover shrouding the landscape below, you'd better think twice about taking on the "Because I can't see any danger, it must be all clear..." attitude and stepping up to Mach schnell speed long radius arcs.

PUUUUULEASE!!! What do you think I'm an idiot?

I've backed off a LOT of stuff cause I couldnt see in the alpine.. I'm talking inbounds here...

 

[dmc]

Sure one should look uphill, but while entering at 20mph??..or at 2mph. Which is easier to avoid by the uphill skier?

Thats a lot of the point I'm trying to make..
Just because your the downhill skier doesnt give you the right to just barge into a trail at 20mph without looking up..