Posted for Nancy Yearout
RE/MAX Properties of the Summit, Breckenridge, Colorado
nyearout@colorado.net
http://www.realestate-breckenridge.net
The state's venerable Colorado Ski Safety Act, which outlines responsibilities
for skiers and resort operators, could be tested in two wrongful-death cases in
which judges recently denied resort-operator requests to dismiss. In December,
Broomfield County District Court Judge Patrick Murphy denied Vail Resorts'
motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by the family of 13-year-old Taft Conlin,
who died in an inbounds avalanche at Vail Mountain in January
2012.
Ruling from the bench, Murphy ruled against Vail's argument that
avalanches are an inherent risk of skiing, saying that avalanches are not listed
in the Ski Safety Act's list of inherent dangers and risks of skiing. If the
legislature had intended avalanches to be an inherent risk, it would be in the
1979 law, Murphy said.
Last month, Routt County District Court Judge
Shelley Hill refused to dismiss a case brought by the family of 19-year-old
Cooper Larsh, who died skiing the Howelsen Hill ski area in Steamboat Springs in
March 2011. Hill sided with the family's argument that the trail where Larsh
died was not properly closed, ruling that the resort operator's failure to rope
off the permanently closed terrain was “an unreasonable risk” and “negligent
omission.”
Both rulings dismissed resort-operator arguments that they
were immune from liability according to the Ski Safety Act and, in the Steamboat
Springs-owned Howel-sen Hill case, the Colorado Governmental Immunity
Act.
“Resorts don't have complete immunity,” said James Heckbert, the
attorney representing the family of Conlin in the lawsuit against Vail Resorts.
“If people or companies are not responsible for their own conduct, then they
just keep on being careless. Immunity breeds irresponsibility, and I think the
ski areas have been lax with their safety programs. They try to put everything
on the skier and have no responsibility of their own. When they are held
responsible, hopefully they will tighten up their conduct.”
The Vail and
Howelsen cases address notification of closures, which is outlined in the Ski
Safety Act as a responsibility of resort operators.
To read this article
in its entirety, go to http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_22651595/court-decisions-could-test-resort-liability-amp-colorado
Courtesy of the Summit Daily News
