 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
10 Recent Topics: Who's left open in New England & New York 4-11-2013
by becca m,
May 21, 2013 - 9:09 PM GMT -
26 RepliesFavorite ski areas you've never been to.
by ski_it,
May 21, 2013 - 6:28 PM GMT -
41 RepliesInterstate Changes in New England and Effects on Ski Industry?
by rocket21,
May 21, 2013 - 6:14 PM GMT -
35 RepliesHaystack news
by rocket21,
May 21, 2013 - 1:50 PM GMT -
3 RepliesElk Mountain, PA loses 70% of snowmaking water!
by obienick,
May 20, 2013 - 7:02 PM GMT -
3 RepliesGuess This Ski Area #1344 /63
by obienick,
May 20, 2013 - 7:01 PM GMT -
8 Replieswhere do you guys have season passes for '13-'14?
by kneedipper,
May 20, 2013 - 4:05 PM GMT -
24 RepliesSomething happening at NELSAP Colby College slope?
by rickbolger,
May 20, 2013 - 1:47 PM GMT -
3 Repliesname your top 5 fave ski areas?
by hunterskier,
May 18, 2013 - 2:37 PM GMT -
42 RepliesJeep tumbles down Pipeline trail at Mountain Creek
by joshua segal,
May 18, 2013 - 10:49 AM GMT -
21 Replies |
||
|
|
|
|
|
 88 guests 4 members
Welcome Anonymous Members logged in: tedede rocket21 DrJeff khowley |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home
Anonymous posts are not allowed in this forum
NH HB619 Ski Law Update
|
Forums : NELSAP Discussion : NELSAP Discussion
Moderated by: Chris, nelsap, Betsy, the_hop |
Anonymous posts are not allowed in this forum
NH HB619 Ski Law Update
| Page: 1 |
| Author | Post |
SpenceProfile | Galleries Rank: 
Member Since: Posts: 257 Location:  |
Posted: May 26, 2005 - 7:56 PM GMTEdited: May 26, 2005 - 7:58 PM GMT Looks like the ski law changes might have passed the senete today next stop will be the govonor's office. the main upates is to formaly extend libility protection to cover snowboarding and tubing. Also added to the object such as stumps man made equipment now includes jumps terian parks verbiage. it also establishes a commite that will make recomdations in novmeber of any other activites that should be added to the list. (like snow blades, sleds, snow toys and so on) __________ Founder of the Arrowhead Recreation Club |
|
treebeard Profile | Galleries Rank:
Member Since: Posts: 589 Location:  |
Posted: May 27, 2005 - 1:19 AM GMT Does this mean people will have to start being accountable for thier own actions? Gosh, how unAmerican.  __________ Embrace that which you fear |
|
WoodCore Profile | Galleries Rank:
Member Since: Posts: 3134 Location:  |
Posted: May 27, 2005 - 2:22 AM GMT Amen! "Live Free or Die!" __________ "Freedom often leads, but responsibility always follows close behind." |
|
Spence Profile | Galleries Rank:
Member Since: Posts: 257 Location: |
Posted: May 27, 2005 - 6:57 PM GMTEdited: May 27, 2005 - 7:01 PM GMT yeah and takes the wind out of the sails of the amblance chasers. There was one yahoo that was considering suing some one over terian park jumps. The Current state law defined the wood ski jumps just as jumps, (now corrected to nordic ski jumps) when refering to jumps the owner or operator of the jumps are responsoble maintianing the jumps or can be liable so you can guess where they were going to go with this. Also non profits like us can breath a little easer. Being that the area is in Claremont the name of the game is how much can we make them bad there butts and this could have been another exusess to have us carry more liablity insureance. this is on top of the padded walls chairs and pants with two pillows tied to our but type deal lol so it was good to see __________ Founder of the Arrowhead Recreation Club |
|
katbennett Profile | Galleries Rank:
Member Since: Posts: 680 Location:  |
Posted: May 27, 2005 - 11:51 PM GMT Spence, your entry made me chuckle. We hadn't broken out the pillows yet but it is nice to know it won't be necessary. This new law does not protect a ski area against NEGILIGENT operation. If a resort runs over a guest with a snowcat, they can still sue. It just states that it doesn't matter if they are on skis, snowboard or a tube, they are taking their own responsibility for their actions. |
|
WoodCore Profile | Galleries Rank:
Member Since: Posts: 3134 Location: |
Posted: May 30, 2005 - 2:31 AM GMT Connecticut just passed a simliar bill into law, PA (public act) 05-78, "An Act Concerning the Liability of Ski Area Operators for Injuries". An Act Concerning the Liability of Ski Area Operators for Injuries __________ "Freedom often leads, but responsibility always follows close behind." |
|
Bill29 Profile | Galleries Rank:
Member Since: Posts: 2414 Location: |
Posted: May 31, 2005 - 1:26 PM GMT katbennett says; "This new law does not protect a ski area against NEGILIGENT operation. If a resort runs over a guest with a snowcat, they can still sue." And there's the rub. As I recall, the insurance problems started a long time ago with Sunday vs Stratton. I believe that Mr. Sunday was skiing on a snowcat path and skied over a branch laying on the trail. He fell, was injured and his crippling injuries were permanent. I believe that Stratton argued that he was not skiing on a trail, though the snowcat path was not closed, and that he could have avoided the branch. The jury didn't buy it and found for Mr. Sunday for about a million bucks. That's my (sometimes faulty) memory. Someone who knows what he or she is talking about can straighten me out on the particulars. My point is that often a jury decides what is negligent. I guess the new laws offer some protection to ski areas and, if they make it more clear that skiing (and boarding) is an assumed risk, that wiill help. |
|
Spence Profile | Galleries Rank:
Member Since: Posts: 257 Location: |
Posted: May 31, 2005 - 9:36 PM GMT hmmm it is an intresting story. There is an area in ski law that is still inplace that is what is called gross neglengents. and comes in a verity of flavors. Before a case againts a ski relateted incindent moves fowared there are two questions that a judge needs to evealuate the first is does the skier protection law apply in this case and or was the ski are grosly neglagent. even quirky situations such as how you close a trail with rope. sounds simple but to put a twist on it lets say in some places they use a plain yellow poly rope and others they use the rope with a close disk on it just that diffrence can cause a leagle head ach for a ski area one of the things insurance companes basic recomdations is to have unversal marking policies like in this case either useing just the yeallow polly rope or use the closed disk on all your trail closing areas. now for this case is intresting it almost sounds like a case of the person going into an unmakred rectricted area and if other sections of the area have similer restricted areas that are marked then this could be a problem. also Boundy primerter markings can be a problem as well if you do it you want to do it in the same manor and could be a good iead like if you see an orange trail blazer and out of bounds signes every so offent that it is the areas boundy marker and should be noted as such in the trail guide to make sure a ski area fully protects it self. The reasoning is that a responsible skier person not fimailer with the are will be using the map for refferance and is assumed will see that information __________ Founder of the Arrowhead Recreation Club |
Page:
1
