#inherent risk

[recreation-law]

TV “fitness race” creates “want to be’s” and “look a likes” and a lawsuit.

The “No Duty Rule” is another way of saying the plaintiff failed to prove the Defendant owed them a duty. In this lawsuit, there was no duty because the risk that caused the injury was inherent to the activity. Barrett v. New Am. Adventures, LLC (W.D. Pa. 2023) State: Pennsylvania, United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh Plaintiff: Courtney Barrett Defendant: New American…

View On WordPress

[recreation-law]

Olson v. Saville, 2d Civ. B324465 (Cal. App. Jan 17, 2024)

For a review of this decision see: Surfboarder who cut off another Surfboarder already in the wave is protected by the defense of Primary Assumption of the Risk Olson v. Saville, 2d Civ. B324465 (Cal. App. Jan 17, 2024) MARK OLSON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. PATRICK SAVILLE, Defendant and Respondent. 2d Civ. No. B324465 California Court of Appeals, Second District, Sixth Division January…

View On WordPress

[recreation-law]

Snowmobiles are an inherent risk on ski slopes in California.

Appellate court decision finds release stopped claims & plaintiff assumed the risk of hitting a stopped snowmobile on the slope. Citation: Valter v. Mammoth Mountain Ski Area, LLC (Cal. App. 2023) State: California, California Court of Appeals, Third District, Mono Plaintiff: JOHN VALTER Defendant: MAMMOTH MOUNTAIN SKI AREA, LLC Plaintiff Claims: improperly drove the snowmobile up the mountain…

View On WordPress

[recreation-law]

In a strange round about way, Missouri Appellate Court finds release stops tubing hill claim, but only after release identified the risk the plaintiff complained of.

In a strange round about way, Missouri Appellate Court finds release stops tubing hill claim, but only after release identified the risk the plaintiff complained of.

Court comes to the conclusion the release is valid, but starts at the very beginning of the law and circles continuously to get there. The Good News is releases are valid under Missouri’s law. The bad news is, you might never know from this decision. Ferbet v. Hidden Valley Golf and Ski, Inc. and Peak Resorts, Inc., State: Missouri, Court of Appeals of Missouri, Eastern District, Fourth…

View On WordPress

[recreation-law]

Ferbet v. Hidden Valley Golf and Ski, Inc. and Peak Resorts, Inc.,

Ferbet v. Hidden Valley Golf and Ski, Inc. and Peak Resorts, Inc.,

Ferbet v. Hidden Valley Golf and Ski, Inc. and Peak Resorts, Inc., Douglas E. Ferbet, Appellant, v. Hidden Valley Golf and Ski, Inc. and Peak Resorts, Inc., Respondents. No. ED108495 Court of Appeals of Missouri, Eastern District, Fourth Division December 15, 2020 Appeal from the Circuit Court of St. Louis County 18SL-CC00050 Honorable Mary Elizabeth Ott. James M. Dowd, P.J., Gary M. Gaertner,…

View On WordPress

[recreation-law]

Inherent Risk is the part of any sport and is assumed by participants when undertaking the activity.

Inherent Risk is the part of any sport and is assumed by participants when undertaking the activity.

A ski trunk just beneath the surface of fresh snow is an inherent risk of skiing in Wyoming. Standish v. Jackson Hole Mountain Resort Corporation State: Wyoming, 10th Circuit Court of Appeals Plaintiff: Thomas A. Standish, IV; Meghan Keiter Defendant: Jackson Hole Mountain Resort Corporation Plaintiff Claims: Negligence and Loss of Consortium Defendant Defenses: Inherent Risk as identified…

View On WordPress

[recreation-law]

Standish v. Jackson Hole Mountain Resort Corporation

Standish v. Jackson Hole Mountain Resort Corporation

Thomas A. Standish, IV; Meghan Keiter, Plaintiffs – Appellants, v. Jackson Hole Mountain Resort Corporation, Defendant-Appellees. No. 20-8045 United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit May 14, 2021 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WYOMING (D.C. NO. 1:19-cv-00004-KHR) Gary L. Shockey, Gary Shockey Law, Casper, Wyoming, for Appellants. James K. Lubing (Nathan D. Rectanus with…

View On WordPress

[recreation-law]

Decision supporting PA ski area when skier skied off the trail supported by the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decision supporting PA ski area when skier skied off the trail supported by the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

The Federal District Court case, Vu v. Ski Liberty Operating Corp., et. al., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49013 and reviewed in Under Pennsylvania law, a collision with other skiers or boarders is an inherent risk of skiing. Skiing off the trail because of the collision is also an inherent risk of skiing was upheld

Citation: Vu v. Ski Liberty Operating Corp., (the decision is so new, not id numbers have…

View On WordPress