Ski Collision Cases
Ski law is state law - so each case is governed by the ski laws of the state in which the accident occurs. Colorado law presumes that the uphill skier is at fault in an accident, because the overtaking skier has the primary duty to avoid the skier below him or her. Thus, one of the key issues in any skier/skier case is who was the uphill or overtaking skier. The nature of the injury often gives substantial clues as to how the accident occurred, the speed at which the skiers were skiing, and the relative angles to each other. All skiers are under a general duty to ski cautiously, within their ability and to maintain control. The Colorado Ski Safety Statute provides that skiers are obliged to maintain a lookout. If one fails to ski in control or to maintain a lookout, the skier is negligent and responsible for the injuries and damages caused.
Colorado law, and ski safety acts in most other states, require individuals involved in skier/skier collisions to stop at the scene, render aid and to give their name, local address, permanent address and identification. But do not rely on ski patrol or ski area operators to obtain this information because, as a principle of law, they are under no duty to obtain the information. Although this absence of duty is under challenge, the courts are reluctant to impose an enforceable duty upon ski area operators to obtain identification information from reckless skiers.
Generally though, ski patrol will compile a relatively comprehensive report concerning the nature, location, and causes of a skier/skier collision which will then become evidence in the ski litigation.
Case reports for recent ski collision cases:
- Kotun v. S.H., a minor - Utah ski collision case results in $1.5 million settlement
- Morgan v. Haynes - Rushing skier collides into other on bridge, settlement of $225,000
- Tarnecki v. T. S., a minor - Snowboarding minor collides with skier on Keystone slope
- Dinh v. P.K., a minor - California minor found to demonstrate "reckless disregard" after colliding into downhill skier
- Rusnak v. Walker - Skier in Michigan assumes the risk of being hit by an uphill skier, but if the uphill skier was negligent, he or she may still be liable
- Maney v. Dunlap - Snowboarder plows into downhill snowboarder causing knee ligament rupture
- Nichols v. Reder - Collision by snowboarder into skier results in ACL rupture, miniscus tear, herniated/bulging discs and PTSD
- Omohundro v. Doud-Lacher - Good Samaritan skier is walloped from above at A-Basin
- Reigner v. N.M. - Collision impact strong enough to break off top of right femoral
- Lackner v. North - Snowboarder acted with reckless disregard in California collision
- Schroeder v. McAvity - Violent collision on Steamboat Springs run results in severe upper-body injuries
- Thompson v. Hall - Minor has lift ticket "Red Tagged" after severe collision shatters other skier's pelvis
- Volinn v. Dutton - Skier on Vail run fails to slow for a roller, collides with downhill skier
- Guzy v. Lewis - Unsupervised minor skier collides into fellow skier at Keystone
- Affa v. Nejezchleb - Witness testimony established that the defendant was sitting back on his skis, skiing straight down the fall line at a high rate of speed and collided into Affa from above
- Kleinstein v. Milkulas - Deadbeat skier skips put on settlement after serious collision with other skier
- Hakim v. Valkoun - Snowboarding class results in one student wiping out fellow student
- Coxon v. Bond - Student in snowboard class run over by skier
- Sale v. Dixon - Vail skier-skier collision settles for $500,000.00
- Schweitzer v. Hubbard - Snowmass collision results in policy limit settlement for severe shoulder fracture
- Bedo v. Klarzuk - Skier at Copper Mountain run over by snowboarder, suffers fractured shoulder
- Handley v. Thoms - Minor skier run over by adult
- Ulissey v. Shvartsman - Broadway dancer awarded $2.4 million for loss of career
