or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Deer Valley negligence suit
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Deer Valley negligence suit - Page 2

post #31 of 72
Since i'm employed at the above named resort, i have to remove myself from making any comments on this subject.
post #32 of 72
I'm not employed at DV, but I ski there quite a bit so here's my thought: maybe DV needs to rethink their policy of helping people unload their skis from their cars, think of the issues if a pair of those shiny new Volants were to be accidently dropped and scratched (imagine the emotional distress and more), oh oh, we could have a cottage industry here!

On a serious note, out of all the places I've skied, I think DV has the most courteous, helpful, friendly staff - I think that it really is a great experience and I would hate for it to change due to this incident.

I tried to look it up and failed, but there was a fairly recent (maybe 2 or 3 years ago I don't recall many details) bit of litigation involving Park City Mountain Resort in which the Resort sucessfully defended themselves and got their expenses paid for. I guess it's wait and see in this one though... in the meantime the skiing sure is good out here in Utah!
post #33 of 72
They'll get thrown out of the courtroom here in Utah. Of course he wants to settle. Sure 'nuff good skiing these days here in Utar..
post #34 of 72
TR I hope You are not one of the five named in that suit. I'm sure that Deer Valley will pervail in this matter.The Number of cases against ski resorts won in court is vary vary small. As sphutt and Rubob have said D.V. employee's are well trained and know how to treat thier Customers.My wife works at Deer Valley part time.I ski there often.In fact I'll be skiing there Wendsday.IMHO Deer Valley does more to make a safe enviroment to ski then most other ski resorts.
post #35 of 72
I like your first reply!

But if you really want a proctological exam, I can arrange for some of the guys at the Blue Oyster Club to give you one...

post #36 of 72
Are you defending a case over here and looking for tips?
I'm sure what you've said makes perfect sense to some, but I am just an idiot, who never posts on topic, and rarely talks about skiing, so there's no point in asking me!

Some things I believe would happen:
1. NHS would cover most, if not all, of the medical expenses.
2. Insurance policies would come into effect - very few self-employed people over here are stupid enough not to have employment insurance.
3. The criminal case against the driver would be brought by the police, resulting in fines, driving ban and or prison sentence.
4. If the driver were from a lawsuit-happy country, he would probably go to the European Court of Human Rights, argue his case, and recieve compensation for being a victim.
(if you didn't know, the ECHR believes that rights are more important than responsibility, and has greater authority than national courts)

If you want assistance with your case, I'll gladly do some research for you, but be warned, my rates are similar to US lawyers.

post #37 of 72
fox hat:Of course, the criminal case is to be expected, but my question relates only to the civil side of the matter. In this country, even if insurance covered the medical expenses and loss of income, the insurance companies paying the bills would definitely sue the insurance companies covering the drunk driver. Insurance companies suing insurance companies. Somehow, somewhere, someone will pay - the question always is, who?

Your reply basically dodged a direct answer to the questions asked, but it was somewhat witty and entertaining. Thanks for the reply.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ March 19, 2002 01:08 PM: Message edited 2 times, by oboe ]</font>
post #38 of 72
There is only one comment I feel I must make after reading the opening post:
I am apalled.
I cannot beleive that someone is being sued for just trying to help.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ March 19, 2002 01:13 PM: Message edited 1 time, by M@tteo ]</font>
post #39 of 72
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by oboe:
Your reply basically dodged a direct answer to the questions asked, but it was somewhat witty and entertaining.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you for the compliment!
My technique for avoiding conflict is to avoid questions I cannot answer in an informed manner, or just to laugh it off. Laughing tends to break the tension.

If you want a serious answer, can you give me enough money to pay for the answer?

post #40 of 72
fox hat:I am absolutely certain that I can pay you what it's worth.
post #41 of 72
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wear the fox hat ?:
I find it amusing the number of people employed in the legal "profession" in America, and it is obvious through their posts here at times that swing from vociferous attacks on those who don't go along with their "laws" (opinions) to pandering to the jury.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I just decided to quote myself here (I often quote myself, it adds spice to my conversation), as my comments seem to have been proved correct!

post #42 of 72
Oh, fox hat, you're not much of a challenge on this one. See you later on another thread, perhaps.
post #43 of 72
This is ridiculous.. As far as I'm concerned there has to be a thicker line drawn between negligence, and the selfless, kind, human action of helping someone in distress. It is absolutely disgusting that in our society you can try to help someone and end up getting sued by them. There have been hundreds of cases of people making their best effort to kindly help someone else out, and they made a mistake or something went wrong, and got sued. I think that's terrible.
Look at it from the lifty's point of view. He / She saw a customer fall in range of the lift, and without even considering otherwise, went to HELP them.

How does that make anyone in this case negligent, especially the lifty or the mountain. If anything the woman is negligent for endangering the safety of herself and others at the mountain that day by getting into a situation where she might fall / block someone's way / crash into someone.

I have worked in many customer service industries, and yes, companies do promote and drill into every employee the concept of taking every opportunity to help a customer and provide world class service, and some would probably argue that this is where the mountain was guilty of negligence. However, the desire to help someone out who's in distress is a form of natural humman compassion and definitely not negligence.

My $0.02,

post #44 of 72
Aren't there a set of laws in the USA called good samiritan laws or something like that? Don't they protect a person who helps another in case things go wrong? I thought I had heard about this here in Colorado in regard to mountain rescue.
post #45 of 72
She does not even have any permanent damage to speak of. She is claiming "emotional trauma"!!! C'mon!!! Active skier who can't get off the lift, needs help getting up and manages to get injured that way. Someone came up behind her, she did not see that person. She was not unconcisous, could have told the guy to stand by, told him that she was fine. I can't even discuss this seriously. :

I should check my insurance booklet, maybe it says on first page: "in the event of accident step one is to find someone else to blame".

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ March 21, 2002 11:03 AM: Message edited 1 time, by eug ]</font>
post #46 of 72
Just a thought here, but most lifts I can think of always had a sign at the bottom which said things like: This is how you use this lift...If you do not know how to get on/off this lift, ask,... etc.

So, if she admits to falling on the off ramp, without asking how to use the lift, surely DV could argue that she obviously didn't know how to use the lift, ignored the instructions, and was therefore in breach of the contract on her lift pass which says "obey all signs"?

Damn, I've been hanging around here too long, I'm starting to sound like a prat.

post #47 of 72
obviously she's another blind adherent to the Culture of Victimhood.

you know, every time one of us is injured, we need to find another person, preferably one with deep pockets and cavernous stores of money lying within, to blame for our injuries. blecch.

bizarro world here we come.
post #48 of 72
The hag should harden up, take the injury on board and get on with her wretched blame-infested existence. Imagine being so desperate for money as to have to resort to that. Filthy animal.
post #49 of 72
OK this is my take on this,

1. This lady is a sad sad case of, "I will sue you if I can for anything I do wrong."

Lets see, I was at soccer camp in IU bloomington when a girl slide tackle me from the side and total destroyed my knee.

Did I sue? No. Was I in a lot of pain. Yes
Did that ruin my soccer scholarship. Yes
Again did I sue. Nope

The lady just is one of those people that cannot take responsibility for herself and get on with her life. I could have sued Indiana University for my injury too, it was their soccer camp, but then I could have not gone to the camp and not played as aggressive as I was. :
post #50 of 72
well you know its not just that we have too many
lawsuits, we have all these people who think their entitled, beacause of this reason or that reason.
Sooner are later the overprivleged take their cue from the 'underprivleged' and start thinking , 'how can i get what i want without working for it? Funny thing is, if the dude didnt help her up, she'd probably be pissed, too.
post #51 of 72
This woman must be an atheist as well, otherwise she would probably sue God for the design of the mountain and quality of snow. (and for not making her a better skier)

post #52 of 72
This thread would crack me up if it wasn't so pathetic.

The US invented, supported & encouraged the whole "legal victim" "lets sue" thing and is now very actively exporting it to the rest of the world. Just like ya crappy "only for the rich" medical insurance system that is trying to take hold in OZ and many other parts of the world.

Now ya all complain .... sheesh. Ya gave all your freedoms to the big business that run ya government. Maybe its time to change the system .... but hey how ya going to do that when their is no seperation between state and business and your whole election process is a business for the morally corrupt.

Scares the hell out of me when GWB says "your either with us or against us" ... Why well this statement, just like the whole legal "sue you", process makes anyone with any moral fortitude the enemy.

Shoot now.

post #53 of 72
How dare the lowly DV liftie peons mishandle the Posh! :
Gather the lawyers and show them that you are not to be trifled with! :
Bleed them dry!! :

Heads will roll!
: :

Fat Pig C : nt
post #54 of 72
Hey OZ, are you going to fly back in time for Sheep Scr--ing Day?
post #55 of 72
This comment is a bit late, opps.

Oboe, It would be more likely that the insurance company of the injured person would take the driver to court as any contract of insurance that the driver had would not be much use with the multiple breaches of policy conditions that the said driver had committed.

In this case the insurance co would be screwed, as most normal people would not have a hope of being able to pay the amount that may be justified in this case.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ March 23, 2002 03:39 PM: Message edited 1 time, by Riccardo ]</font>
post #56 of 72
Riccardo, in some states, drivers are required to have insurance in case they negligently injure someone else. Also, many people are covered by medical insurance for medical expenses they incur. If a driver negligently injures someone, and that someone sues and wins money, the medical insurance company will try to get paid back from the money the injured person has won in the lawsuit. So this is one way in which the insurance companies are after each others' money. I hope this doesn't sound so complicated that it's not understood . . . but maybe it does! Sorry, it's the best I can do right now.

The mob reaction on this thread is not pretty. The woman who is suing has been referred to as "fat" - where does it say that she's fat? That's an assumption. And if it turns out she IS fat, SO WHAT? No one here really knows just what the lifty [and apparently others] did that the woman claims was improper. Falling while unloading from the lift can happen to anyone, especially if the unloading area has an improper hazzard, or if another clumsy skier knocks you down. If that happened to any of you, I'm sure there are stupid ways that a lifty could "help" that would really piss you off, and you just might sue. Now the impression given by the news article is exactly what people here are assuming - that the injured woman is a money grubbing person with overstated injuries and a victim mentality - and we might find out that is exactly the truth! But we don't KNOW that at this point. So ganging up on her now seems like "lynch mob" activity - it's premature. This is not the American fairness and justice for which many have shed blood to protect. For heaven's sake, try to nurture the patience to wait for the facts, if it's so all-fired important. Businesses are sued all the time for many things - they did not pay a bill, they failed to perform as they had contracted to do, they built a structure negligently and the owners want the expenses of repair to be paid by the company at fault. There are, I am sure, a NUMBER of lawsuits against ski areas - some for the kind of negligence being claimed by the falling-getting-off-the-lift woman, some because a ski area employee hit someone in the head with a shovel [yes!], some because the area owes money - whatever. Some of the claims, when examined, are actually sound claims made in good faith, and others are not. Such is life. We never hear about 99.9999% of them. Why some get all this press attention is not always clear - maybe it was a slow news day.

Gonz has, no doubt, developed his own cynicism because of his professional experiences with phony claimants - and I, from my own experiences with clearly stupid claims against business which I have been privileged to represent, tend to share some of that cynisism, including the "victim mentality" thing. But there ARE some valid cases; and without the hard evidence [NOT newspaper articles] we do not necessarily know which is which - that's what courts are for. Is it at least possible to consider this: Before a lynching, there should be a fair trial. You would not like it if people ganged up on YOU for some reason, and especially if they did not even have access to the pertinent evidence. To prejudge a matter such as the one discussed on this thread is not any "nicer" than bringing a phony lawsuit.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ March 23, 2002 07:17 PM: Message edited 2 times, by oboe ]</font>
post #57 of 72
P.S. Newspapers and other media have been known to "color", "slant", "shade" or exagerate "facts".
post #58 of 72
You do Your profession Proud.You are a voice of reason.I am not saying that to be sarcastic.In any Profession there are good people and Bad people.Some use the Law to make Millions for themselves with little regard to what it means to the rest of the cummunity as a whole.I get a feeling that you have turned down some cases becuse You felt it was more about greed then doing the right thing.I agree there is little to gain by calling this woman names. Maybe Deer Valley and the young lifty did do something wrong.However my knowlage of Deer Valley and the way they do things I doubt that they are in the wrong.They are a vary well run company.People Here in Park City Like working at deer Valley They like the way they treat thier Employee's and guest.It's a class act way beyond the so called glitz and glamor of Deer Valley. It really doesn't matter if your wearing 10 year old gortex and duct tape or the newest $2000.00 Proda ski outfit Deer Valley treats you as a guest.My wife works part time in the ski school selling lessions and other services.You would not believe how far Deer Valley will bend over backwards to make a skier happy.When Deer Valley Has been in the wrong They own up to it quick. There was a case in two years ago in The Summer when a Mountain Biker was stuck on the lift all night.The guy attempted to clime down from the chair He fell and broke both legs.In that case Deer Valley stepped up to the plate and did the right thing.The Biker and his Father were vary impressed with all that Deer Valley did for them. It went beyond Money.I have skied other Mountains and smelled pot smoke coming out of the lift shack!Now that was a Law suit waiting to Happen!So lets wait and se what happens with this thing but my money is on Deer Valley.
post #59 of 72
Utah49: Thank you for that compliment. Yes, I HAVE turned down cases over the thirty-five years of my law practice, and yes it IS about more than JUST money. I'm not as rare in the profession as some might believe - you just won't get any news stories about us. Many if not most lawyers don't want to waste their time with garbage cases that have no merit.

I have thoroughly enjoyed Deer Valley and have great respect for the resort, so I feel that your bet may be well founded. Sometimes, though, bad things happen to good people - we all have lapses, and we all can be at fault.

My point was, let's wait and see.

Thanks again for the compliment and the thoughtful post in general.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ March 23, 2002 07:20 PM: Message edited 1 time, by oboe ]</font>
post #60 of 72
Next time you get the chance to visit Utah, I would be Happy to show you some of my Home Mountains notice I am lucky to have more then one Home Mountain.I think of it as sort of Skiing Polygamy.Theres a lot of that here in Utah
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Deer Valley negligence suit