Taking her daughter to see a ski jump competition, a young mother had the misfortune of choosing a vantage point in a roped-off area adjoining the out-run terminal. As one of the contestants landed, one of his skis separated from his boot and skidded some 400 feet into the girl, causing her injuries.
In a subsequent suit against the ski area operator, the young girl claimed that the operator was negligent in failing to take sufficient precautions to protect spectators from such a mishap. The trial court dismissed the claim, and the appeals court affirmed this determination.
The court’s conclusion rested upon their finding that “the construction and operation of this ski course conformed to accepted practices at similar installations. The course consisted of the usual ‘in run,’ ‘take off area,’ ‘landing hill’ and ‘out run’ terminating in an enlarged circular area denominated ‘out-run terminal.’ The out run is approximately 400 feet long. There was a roped-off area for spectators, with flagged poles at 20-foot intervals.” In addition, the spectators area was policed by the operator’s employees.
Moreover, noted the appeals court, the head of the operator’s police force “testified that he had no knowledge of a similar accident since the installation of the slide” some 23 years before. Though the “skis are attached to the skier in such a manner that they will come off in case of a fall,” there clearly was no proof “that loose skis have caused any accident to or injury to spectators” at the area in the past, the court added.
While it is true, concluded the court, “that on an occasion of the nature here under consideration the [operator] is required to exercise care to protect [his] visitors from known dangers or from those reasonably to be anticipated,” it is also true that this event was not reasonably foreseeable. Consequently, it was not the ski area operator’s duty to guard spectators against such a mishap.
Columnist Stephen Fine is a partner in New York law firm Lubell, Lubell, Fine & Schaap.
