Fines issued after fatality for failing to have proper permits on USFS land
Posted: July 29, 2008 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Aspen Daily News, Aspen Highlands, Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, Ski Resort, United States Forest Service, US Forest Service Leave a commentThe Aspen Daily News is reporting that three people have been cited in conjunction with the death of Wallace Westfeldt. The citations are for filming on US Forest Service land without the proper film permits. The Story, Three cited in fatal film shootstates the fines will be $500 each.
Image via Wikipedia
The citations came after the investigation into the death of Westfeldt. Westfeldt died while filming in Tonar Bowl outside of Aspen Highlands ski area. Tonar died after jumping off a cliff for a film shoot for the Aspen Ski Company. See Snowboarder killed in Highlands backcountry.
Two stories in the Aspen Daily News hinted that the Aspen Ski Company knew they had violated the law. See: SkiCo vows to ‘more carefully scrutinize permit compliance’ and Fatal Tonar shoot may have broke law.
All commercials activities that occur on US Forest Service lands (as well as NPS and BLM lands) must be done with a commercial permit. The permits are issued to make sure the land is not destroyed, the visitor experience is not altered and that no risk is posed for a visitor. The USFS also receives income from issuing the permits.
Information about Special Use Permits can be found at the US Forest Special Use website. Information on filming on Forest Service lands can be found at http://www.fs.fed.us/specialuses/special_film.shtml.
There is a difference between taking a photograph or movie for your personal use or to bore your friends and neighbors after you get home. If you are going to use the photographs or video for commercial purposes, to promote a commercial venture or business you must have a permit from all federal land management agencies.
The three men can either pay the fine or within thirty days contest the charges in Federal Court. The charges are a Class B Misdemeanor.
Image via Wikipedia
Wow, someone apologized
Posted: July 25, 2008 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Military, Organizations, Portsmouth Herald, Recreation 1 CommentI wrote about Adam Dzialo in Serious Disconnect: Why people sue. If you read this post, please read the comment. Comments: Recreation Law: Serious Disconnect: Why people sue. Adam Dzialo’s father left a post saying the college finally apologized after 9 years.
The Portsmouth Herald Mass News reported in Family of boy injured at camp reaches $936,000 settlementthat the case settled.
Another lawsuit between a skier and a snowboarder
Posted: July 24, 2008 Filed under: Skier v. Skier | Tags: Alpine skiing, Colorado, Colorado Mountain College, Leadville Colorado, Ski, Ski Resort, Sports 1 CommentAs I have talked about before, skier v. snowboard litigation is growing and a real mess. See 8 Year old boy sued in Colorado for ski collision. That case settled, see Lawsuit settles. However another lawsuit has been filed in Colorado see: Lawsuit filed in Snowmass skiing accident.
In this current case a husband and wife from Illinois are suing a snowboarder from New York. Allegedly the snowboarder was uphill from the plaintiffs and traveling at a high rate of speed when he hit the husband. The husband suffered a broken leg, broken collarbone and a torn rotator cuff. The spouse is suing for Loss of Consortium. Loss of Consortium is the loss of the services a spouse provides to a marriage. Loss of consortium includes the loss of sex. If you married sex has a value.
Colorado specifically allows for skier v. skier litigation in its Skier Safety Act. C.R.S. 33-44-109(1) (see below) when many states have said that skier v. skier collisions are a risk you assume when skiing. (Skiing here is interchangeable for any activity at a ski resort using the snow and mountain.)
The legal basis of the complaint is the failure of the snowboarder to comply with the Colorado Skier Safety Act. The Colorado skier safety act is a statute first passed in 1979 and amended several times. It is the strongest legislation protecting ski areas in the US. The act does have several requirements for skiers. Colorado Revised Statutes § 33-44-108 states:
As you read through this section of the act, you will notice however that the act places burdens on all skiers that must be followed. If you don’t you could be sued.
When you ski, you have to follow the rules and the laws. Everyone worries about the speed patrol or the ski patrol yanking their ski passes if they ski too
Image via Wikipedia
fast or out of control. Here you can see if you ski out of control the repercussions can be much worse.
If you would like more education about ski area liability I teach a college level ski area risk management course through Colorado Mountain College. The course is SAO 110. The course is taught in Leadville Colorado for 10 weeks in the fall and is available online year round.
MA proposed stupid bill to promote litigation in kayaking
Posted: July 24, 2008 Filed under: Paddlesports | Tags: American Red Cross, Business, Kayak, Massachusetts, Organizations, Sea kayak 4 CommentsI always love it when people who have no idea what they are talking about, tell others how to do something. I’m not talking about tourists at Devils Tower
Image via Wikipedia
Monument; in this case I’m talking the Massachusetts‘s legislation and how to teach sea kayaking.
Want proof? This was reported as testimony before a legislative committee.
Rep. William M. Straus, D-Mattapoisett is the sponsor of the bill and author of the quote above. As a member of the board of directors of the Trade Association of Paddlesports (but speaking for myself) and a boater for 45 years, I’ve never seen a kayak that I was “strapped into” fully or not fully.
The Massachusetts legislation is proposing that kayaking schools must teach someone how to wet exit.
That is as dumb as it sounds!
The idea is based on, of course, a grieving family person, who is guessing that there relative died when he could not wet exit from his overturned boat. So we need to make sure no one else suffers that same fate, I guess.
First off, no reports show how or why the person died. But that does not matter, the legislature needs to act.
What’s worse is the witness reports about the accident state he victim was upright when he died, that he had rolled back up. Kayak student drowns off West Island. Consequently the new law about teaching wet exiting is not even based on events the law attempts to cure.
Things get worse. A kayak instructor would have to have the following to teach kayaking:
- First aid training approved by the MA Department of Public Health
- Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training approved by the MA Department of Public Health
- Certification from the American Canoe Association
- Water rescue certification from the American Red Cross.
Is this measure going to save a life? No. What this measure will do is three things.
First it will make the widow feel better. She will feel like she has done something to keep someone from dying. She will feel like her husband did not die in vain. Our loved ones are not allowed to die without a cause or accomplishment in the US we must go out with either a bang or a legacy.
Second it will create lawsuits. We now have rules that will give anyone injured kayaking the opportunity to start a lawsuit. The first aid card of the instructor was out of date, the class did not fully cover wet exiting, the ACA certified instructor left the class for a minute and the non-ACA certified assistant was the only person there. I was not taught correctly therefore I can sue.
Third we will also have more government regulation. We have a state agency sticking their nose into kayaking schools and telling them how to do things. Again, another group of people who know nothing about what they are talking about, telling someone else how to do it. This blog seems to be coming around full circle: People with no clue telling those with the necessary education and experience how to do something.
See House endorses kayak wet-exit training
Two reasons why you want the release to be upheld in court
Posted: July 23, 2008 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Bullriding, Manhattan, Mechanical bull, New York, New York City, Rockefeller Center Leave a comment1. Because you want to support release law
2. Because idiots, or better drunk idiots should not be able to sue.
The New York Daily News is reporting two individuals have filed suit against a Manhattan bar, Johnny Utah’sover injuries they received when they were
Cover via Amazon
thrown from a mechanical bull.
See Woman tossed from bull ride sues NY restaurant, Mechanical Bull Suit Goes To Court, Raging bull rider suing restaurant and Johnny Utah’s slapped with second lawsuit over mechanical ‘menace’.
You first have to overcome the issue of a “cowboy bar’ in Manhattan. If that bothers you definitely don’t go the bar’s website, the theme from old spaghetti’s westerns and cows mooing alone will crack you up…..or at least those of us who live in the west. But then you realize it is just a bar that has held onto a theme….for twenty years. Urban Cowboy?
The first patron is claiming that the bar should not have allowed him to ride the bull inebriated. Of course it is a bar where most people go to drink and become inebriated. The suit describes the bull as a “danger” because it lacks the “proper safeguards and padding to break falls.” The writer describes the bull as “furry with padded horns.”
Another article describes the second rider suing claiming “”assault and battery” because she was allowed to ride the bull at Johnny Utah’s in Rockefeller Center.”
So why am I writing about these lawsuits. Not a lot of outdoor recreation in New York City that most of my articles are about. However in both cases the patrons signed a release before climbing on the “dangerous beast.” New York law is always tricky at best because of General Obligation Law § 5-326 Releases not valid in places of amusement for a fee. This statute states that releases are void if the signor paid a fee to enjoy the amusement. Here the issue will be did the bar charge to ride the bull or to get through the door.
Releases are also interpreted narrowly and that interpretation varies based on the court. See Case Brief: New York upholds release for negligence claim with purchase of paraglider, Poorly crafted release and court’s interpretation of certification dooms defendant, Case Brief: New York Court Invalidates Release Lacking Clear Language, and NY State Law Does Not Prohibit Releases in All Cases.
Someplace there is a cowboy in Wyoming picking him or herself up off the ground after being violently thrown from a real bull with real horns who is mean or maybe just mad and who landed on hard dirt. No padded horns, no padded landing area just doing what real cowboys do. Oh, and no release because real cowboys assume the risk and cowboy up.
CALL FOR EDITOR
Posted: July 22, 2008 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Academic journal, Academic publishing, Berkeley Electronic Press, Electronic journal, Elsevier, Journals, Manuscript Leave a commentThe Association of Outdoor Recreation and Education, The Wilderness Education Association and the Western Kentucky UniversityResearch Foundation have
Image via Wikipedia
developed a new peer reviewed journal for the outdoor profession.
Journal Philosophy & Purpose: Given the current culture of many academic journals JOREL will fulfill a major gap created by the distinction placed on “practitioner” versus “academic” shared knowledge. The purpose of JOREL is to deliver best practices and research based information to the outdoor community in one publication.
Journal Format: JOREL, a subscription-based electronic journal, will create greater accessibility to a global audience while maintaining reasonable subscription rates. In addition, using tools from The Berkeley Electronic Press will help ensure compliance with web content accessibility standards.
Primary Editor Responsibilities: The Editor’s primary responsibilities include ensuring manuscript quality, recruiting manuscript submissions, assigning reviewers, tracking submissions and reviewer progress, communication with authors and seeing that publication deadlines are met. JOREL will utilize resources from The Berkeley Electronic Press, such as EdiKit Back Office Solutions to assist the editor in these duties.
The Editor will work with a six member advisory group comprised of two representatives from WEA, AORE and WKU.
Editor Salary: $3,000 annually.
Publication Schedule: Three issues annually.
Editor Qualifications: The successful candidate will have a strong publication record and manuscript reviewing experience.
Interested parties should send CV highlighting publication and manuscript reviewing history to Dr. Thomas Stuessy at: stuessyt@greenmtn.edu
Applications due via e-mail July 21, 5:00 P.M.
Another Litigation versus Criminal example
Posted: July 22, 2008 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Asia, Business, Canada, Court, Japan, Jet Ski, Law, Lawsuit Leave a commentI’ve all ready commented about this issue length in Litigation v. Jail Time; however this article caught my eye. At the very bottom it
Image via Wikipedia
mentions another boating accident. The owner of the jet skis who rented the jet skis was fined £450 for renting the jet skis.
Again another example of how in the US we sue, in Europe they charge criminally. Although in this case a £450 fine is probably much easier to deal with than protracted litigation, it still is a criminal charge that will be on someone’s record for life.
However the basic issue is who is going to take responsibility for dealing with problems. In Europe the government deals with the liability between two people. In the US, most of the time the victim is in charge of his life and any money someone may owe him.
See: Brit held after death of Cypriot diver
Moab Confluence: Edward Abbey Writing Contest
Posted: July 20, 2008 Filed under: Uncategorized Leave a commentAnnouncing the 2008 Confluence Writing Contest
Confluence: A Celebration of Reading and Writing in Moab, UT is hosting its first online writing contest. Submit your work through our website, http://www.moabconfluence.org, and compete for a $250 cash prize and the opportunity to be published in the Mountain Gazette.
The 2008 theme for Confluence is the writing of Edward Abbey. In honor of this theme, Confluence hopes to encourage and promote writing in a style that evokes the spirit and emotion that Edward Abbey was famous for – a story, fiction or non-fiction, that creates a desire to get off the couch and get outside – an article that brings the author’s place, its smells and the feeling of being there, right to the reader and motivates him or her to do something, to get going.
Submissions must be original work of less than 5,000 words. All work must be submitted by September 15th, 2008, and the winner will be announced on October 19th, 2008.
Please see our website for more detailed information about submission, judges, and how to enter.
http://www.moabconfluence.org/writingcontest.cfm
Please contact me if you have any questions about this contest, our literary festival scheduled for October 14 – 19, writing workshops, or how hot it is in Moab right now!
Laurie Collins
Confluence Director
435-220-0068
Hilton Hotel does not need a warning sign
Posted: July 17, 2008 Filed under: Assumption of the Risk, Wisconsin | Tags: Appellate Court, Business Services, Hilton, Lilly Pad, Marcus Corporation, Milwaukee, Signage, Trial court, Warning sign, Waterpark, Wisconsin Leave a commentSigns, signs, everywhere there’s signs*, except at the Lily Pad Walk at the Hilton Milwaukee Center. Briane Pagel Jr. and his family sued the Hilton Milwaukee Center which is or has a waterpark on its premises. Mr. Pagel had been injured when he fell off the lily pad walk.
The lily pad walk is a series of large floating vinyl pads. There is an overhead net someone can grab to assist their walk or stop their fall. Mr. Pagel tried the walk and fell into the water. Then he tried again, falling and injuring his back.
Mr. Pagel claimed the hotel should have posted warning signs. The trial court judge dismissed the case and awarded the hotel their costs of $1,394. The appellate court agreed, stating the dangers were open and obvious to the reasonable user and not warning or signs were required.
*Apologies to Tesla and the song Signs
Pagel v. Marcus Corporation, 2008 Wisc. App. LEXIS 423
Criminal Charges brought against Everest Guide in the UK
Posted: July 15, 2008 Filed under: Mountaineering Leave a comment
The Yorkshire Post UK, Everest killing charge , reported on what appears to be the extreme result of frustration, anger and loss. The father of a climber lost on Everest in 1999 has brought criminal charges against three of the outfitters and guides on the climb. David Matthews’s, 62, millionaire father of the missing and presumed dead Michael Matthews, 22, an Everest summiter, brought the prosecution. Charged where Jonathan Tinker, Henry Todd and Michael Smith with unlawfully killing and manslaughter in Central Criminal Court, London. The charges were eventually dismissed by the court. (See Everest verdict that frees the mountain.)
Michael Matthews disappeared as he was descending from the summit in 100 mile per hour winds. Mr. Matthews has also sued the outfitter and guides in this matter. The civil lawsuit is still pending in the US.
As most readers to this blog know, any mountain holds the lives of the climbers on its flanks and consequently the lives of those relatives sitting at home. Those who tackle these mountains accept that risk, in fact thrill in revel in it. However families at home may or may not understand both the risk and our acceptance of it.
Complicate this lack of understanding of the motivation with the question what happened? We have grown up learning each day how our world works. Green cheese once formed the moon we then saw a rock that came from the moon. Transplanting hearts from the dead to the living was the subject of movies and nightmares; today there is someone in every community who lives because of it. Yet, how and why someone dies on the summit of Everest, at least for now is a mystery. We can speculate based on those who have come close and survived as well as the research done by our scientist, but we want a body and we want to know why and how a loved one died.
My father had a large life insurance policy on me for many years. He figured half would go to get my body home. I never cared and told him to spend the money, rather than bring me home but he said “your mother would insist on it.”
At what point do those unanswered questions require an answer so badly that we not only sue someone, but we have them charged criminally. At what point does the loss of a loved one, require the destruction of the people the deceased wanted to spend time with. No more answers are going to be forthcoming. No answers at all will be found in either the criminal or civil courtroom. In fact, rarely are any answers found in court.
This lawsuit and these criminal charges will bring no satisfaction and no answers. At best it may create some level of retribution, possibly justice to the father when it is done, but even that is doubtful. At some point in life, you just must accept the fact that a loved one lived and died doing what they enjoyed and accept as much comfort as you can from that.
Colorado State Parks Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan
Posted: July 15, 2008 Filed under: Colorado | Tags: Adventure travel, Colorado, Colorado State Parks, JimMoss, Outdoor recreation, Rock climbing, Ropes course Leave a commentColorado State Parks is excited to announce the release of the Draft 2008 Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) for public review! You can access the entire document (including maps) at: http://parks.state.co.us/Trails/LWCF/SCORPplan/. Colorado‘s SCORP provides a critical five-year plan for addressing key outdoor recreation needs and issues through 2013. Developed in collaboration with a diverse 33-member Steering Committee, the SCORP serves as the principal guide for statewide outdoor recreation planning.
Litigation v. Jail Time
Posted: July 9, 2008 Filed under: Criminal Liability | Tags: Aviation, Concorde, Continental, Continental Airlines, France, United Airlines Leave a commentMany times I hear the argument that we need to adopt the European legal system. The belief is that the Europeans don’t sue, make it very hard to sue and that is a better system for defendants. That is correct; however the European system also has a little twist we don’t have in the US: Jail Time.
In Europe the requirements to start a lawsuit are very high and the types of things you can sue over are limited. However the requirements to be arrested and charged with a crime are low, are much broader and the level of proof to convict someone are much lower. Example of this is playing out in the US and France this week.
On July 25, 2000 a Concorde jet crashed in France killing all on board. On July 3, 2008 Continental Airlines and two Continental employees were charged in a French court with manslaughter. The crash was attributed to a piece of a Continental jet falling off as the jet was taking off. That piece of metal was run over by the Concorde jet causing a tire to blow out and the parts going into the engine causing the crash.
Here in the US, Continental might be sued for this type of thing. Maybe money would be exchanged, maybe. No crime would be charged because there was no scienter or “criminal mind.” No one was attempting or thinking about a crime, there was no criminal intent.
That is not required in Europe or France, where by the way you are guilty until proven innocent to some extent.
In most European countries there is a very different way of approaching problems. There the government is in charge of making the public safe. In realty, in our “Laissez-faire” business environment most businesses are kept in line by the threat of litigation. In Europe businesses are kept in line by the government who puts you in jail if you are not doing a good job, if you fall out of line.
For information on the charges against continental airlines see: Airline to be tried for Concorde crash and French court to try US airline over Concorde crash.
Laissez-faire by the way is a French term.
Cyclists suing over hole in bike path
Posted: July 8, 2008 Filed under: Cycling | Tags: Bicycle helmet, Bikeway, Cycling, Iowa, Sports Leave a commentA cyclist is suing King County Washington for $20 million for an accident he had on a bike path. Injured bicyclist sues King County over hazard in path.
Image via Wikipedia
While on a bike ride in September of 2006 the front wheel of his bike hit a hole around a metal monument in the bike path. He fell from his bike suffering a traumatic brain injury even though he was wearing a bike helmet. He is still recovering from the accident.
Your heart has to go out to the cyclists and his family. A man was cycling one minute and two years later is trying to learn how to walk again.
It is hard to get more bike paths when we sue over the ones we get. Bike paths in most states are not a fiscal priority. In fact it takes tons of work by cyclists to get more bike paths. When a million dollar bike path turns around and costs the county $20 million and legal fees a lot of bike paths, nationwide suffer. This problem is currently facing RAGBRAI in Iowa. After lawsuit, Crawford County bans RAGBRAI.
Historically the courts have held you assume the risk of cycling on the streets. (See Case Brief: New York Court Finds for Club Med in 2002 Patron Bike Fall and Furgang v. Club Med, Inc., 299 A.D.2d 162; 753 N.Y.S.2d 359; 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10593. Subscription site).
It will be awhile before we know the outcome of this case. However we will probably feel the effects immediately.
Colorado River Basin Science and Resource Management Symposium
Posted: July 8, 2008 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Adaptive management, Colorado, Colorado River, Glen Canyon Dam, United States, United States Bureau of Reclamation, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, United States Geological Survey Leave a commentThis symposium will promote the exchange of information on research and management activities related to the restoration/conservation of the Colorado River and its major tributaries from the headwaters to the U.S./Mexico border. This 2-1/2 day symposium will feature plenary sessions as well as concurrent technical sessions, vendors and poster sessions.
Program Highlights
Image via Wikipedia
Multiple programs to restore and conserve the Colorado River’s native species and habitat have evolved independently since 1980 – programs that have had a major impact on water management and conservation efforts. These programs have many common goals and objectives, but there has been no formal opportunity for the exchange of information among these programs. This basin-wide symposium will provide scientists, stakeholders, land and resource managers, and decision-makers the opportunity to learn about these various programs and exchange ideas and data enhancing the effectiveness of these programs – and their success in restoring and conserving the river’s ecosystem.
Plenary and Technical Session Topics Include:
➤Status and trends of aquatic resources, including native and nonnative fishes
➤Climate change and long term drought: how will it affect restoration efforts?
➤Adaptive management and collaborative management decision making
➤Instream flow management and protection (including dam operations and reservoirs)
➤Nonnative fish management and restoration
➤Integrating recreational fisheries with native fish conservation
➤Monitoring program design and effectiveness
➤Native fish propagation, stocking genetic management
➤Sediment conservation and management
➤Societal values and Native American perspectives
➤Riparian habitat monitoring and restoration
More information on this symposium –
including a secure, on-line registration form –
is available at http://www.watereducation.org
U.S. Geological Survey – Southwest Biological Science Center
Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program
Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program
Bureau of Reclamation
National Park Service
Colorado River Fish and Wildlife Council
Water Education Foundation
San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program
Conference Sponsors:
Time and Place: All day Tuesday, November 18, all day Wednesday, November 19, and the morning of Thursday, November 20 at the Doubletree Resort Hotel, 5401 N. Scottsdale Road in Scottsdale.
Registration: $250; fee includes lunches and receptions on November 18 and 19.
Hotel Reservations: We have secured a limited number of rooms at the special rate of $102, plus tax, per night. You can call to reserve a room, 480-947-5400, or access the room block at http://doubletree.hilton.com/en/dt/groups/ personalized/PHXSJDT-WEF-20081114/ index.jhtml Be sure to mention the Water Education Foundation.
Vendors and Sponsors: Booth spaces are available for $1,000; sponsoring opportunities are available. Contact Jean Nordmann at Water Education Foundation for information, 916-444-6240 or jnordmann@watereducation.org
Abstracts: For information on abstract format, including a sample, and contact information for abstract submittal, visit the Water Education Foundation’s web site, www.watereducation.org
Conference Sponsors:
For more information, contact Water Education Foundation
GCRGA and the BQR
Posted: July 4, 2008 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Arizona, Boatman Quarterly River, Colorado, GCRGA, Grand Canyon, Grand Canyon National Park, Grand Canyon River Guides Association, National Parks and Monuments, Park, Travel and Tourism Leave a commentI get a ton of magazines, online and in print. The one that is always scanned before I leave the post office and read as soon as I get back is the Boatman’s
Grand Canyon 1 (Photo credit: krandolph)
Quarterly Review. The BQR is the quarterly publication of the Grand Canyon River Guides Association. I work in the Grand Canyon as a boatman every once in a while and it’s never enough time in the canyon. However my reasons for loving the BQR are the publication itself. It is filled with articles about the history, flora, fauna, geology and people of the Grand Canyon. Most importantly each article is filled with passion for the Grand Canyon. It is extremely well written and brings to life that beautiful part of the world in my home in Colorado that is a thousand miles away.
If you are a lover of the Grand Canyon, have hiked it or rowed it I strongly urge you to join the Grand Canyon River Guides Association. The GCRGA is working hard to preserve the canyon. The association will, if you want, keep you up to date on what is going on both at the bottom of the canyon and the top of the bureaucracy. The GCRGA is a great organization that is full of passionate, hard working people that I am proud to be allowed to associate with.
If you don’t know anything about the Grand Canyon but each quarter want a publication that will leave you breathless and wondering why you have not gotten there or back there, become a member of the GCRGA. You don’t have to be a river guide, only a lover of great writing and/or the Grand Canyon.
Membership is $30 a year or you can get a lifetime membership for $277. (As they say, one dollar for every mile the river flows.)
You should also go, see, and experience the Grand Canyon.
The word “Safe” comes back to haunt outfitter and travel agent
Posted: July 2, 2008 Filed under: Whitewater Rafting | Tags: Grand Teton, Grand Teton National Park, Jackson Hole, National Park Service, Snake River, Vail Resorts Leave a commentJackson Hole News is reporting that a lawsuit has been filed over a rafting accident that occurred in 2006. Robert and Patricia Rizas are suing Vail
Image via Wikipedia
Resorts, Grand Teton Lodge Company and Tauck Inc. for loss of income, earnings, medical expenses, pain and suffering and physical disability and loss of enjoyment of life and hoping for punitive damages
The accident that gave rise to the litigation occurred at Deadmans Bar on the Snake River in Grand Teton National Park. Three people died in the suit, two of whom were the brother and sister in law of the plaintiffs. However none of the claims being alleged assert a claim for the loss of life of their relatives.
Few states allow a sibling to recover for the loss of life of another sibling. Those states that do allow a sibling to recover for the loss of another sibling only allow recovery of minimal damages. In order to recover damages, the person who survives must have a direct and past or future monetary relationship with the deceased. By that I mean parents and children can sue for the loss of the other as well as the spouse for the loss of a spouse. Very rarely do courts allow or provide monetary damages for the loss of a sibling.
The defendants in this case are a little hard to sort out. <
Grand Teton Lodge is a lodge located in Grand Teton National Park. The lodge as part of the activities it offers guests is river trips on the Snake River. Grand Teton Lodge is owned by Vail Resorts Management Company, Inc. is a company selling tours, which in this case included nights at the lodge and the river trip. The river trips are described on the Grand Teton Lodge website as
The general allegations are the lodge and Vail conspired with the tour company to mislead and defraud the plaintiffs into taking a river trip which was described as safe.
The plaintiff’s state the Tauck brochure described the river trip as a “serene float through magnificent mountain scenery” which is very similar to how the Grand Teton Lodge website describes the
They are also claiming the brochures, the lodge and the raft guide described the river trip as safe. The river was running at run off levels at the time of the trip.
The complaint states the shuttle driver said the river trip was safe. The complaint also states the shuttle ride was more dangerous than the river trip.
The complaint states the companies were negligent in failing to warn of the dangers of the river during peak run off. The defendants were also negligent for not properly training the passengers, failing to provide a competent guide and equipment suitable for the conditions.
They plaintiffs are also claiming fraud because the defendants hid the dangers of the river. Had the plaintiffs known of the dangers of the river they would not have gone on the river trip. The complaint allegedly states the defendants place corporate profit above the personal safety
There are several interesting legal issues floating around in this case. The first is an attempt to have any release or acknowledgment of risk form thrown out of the case. The accident occurred inside the Grand Teton National Park so supposedly the river outfitter would be operating under a Permit or Concession contract with the
National Park Service
As a permittee the only document that can be used to reduce liability is the NPS Here claim that there was fraud involved will void any contract between the parties. The second is the use of the word safe. When people hear the word safe it is not a word that brings up a comparison of how safe, but to most people means absolutely risk free. So when any person, website or brochure states an activity is safe, that activity is risk free. Families take safe trips, they do not take dangerous ones. Fathers and mothers do not take their kids on risky activities.
Yet safe is a relative term. The most dangerous place in the US is the home bathroom. It is more dangerous, in most cases, to drive to the river than to raft the river. Although who knows based on the description of the shuttle ride in this case.
However here, the defendants are going to have an uphill battle if the statements are proved that the river trip is safe. People were injured, people died and people did not have a good time, therefore the river trip was not safe.
Safe is not a word that you should use in any communication with a possible client. Life is not safe.
Everyman lives for the time and the place to prove he is more than everyone else believes he is.
Posted: June 30, 2008 Filed under: Uncategorized Leave a commentEveryman lives for the time and the place to prove he is more than everyone else believes he is.
Lawsuit against university outdoor program
Posted: June 27, 2008 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Assumption of risk, Columbus Dispatch, Law, Ohio University 3 CommentsThe Columbus Dispatch is reporting that Christopher Mance has filed a lawsuit against Ohio Universityfor injuries he suffered when he fell into a fire on a
Image via Wikipedia
University outdoor trip. The story is titled Disfiguring fall into campfire spurs lawsuit against OU. Mance, the plaintiff was a few credits from completing his bachelor’s degree to become a wilderness educator. During a wilderness survival trip in 2006 he suffered an epileptic seizure and fell face first into a fire suffering burns to his face, arms and hands.
The plaintiff and his family are suing the university for $300,000 because they claim the university was responsible for the accident. They claim the plaintiff is unable to secure work in the outdoor field after receiving his injuries.
The university knew of the plaintiff’s medical condition which he noted on a medical form he completed before going on the trip. (For more information on why pre-trip medical forms create liability see: Legal Issues in Wilderness First Aid.) The plaintiff was taking medication to control the seizures but the drug is allegedly less effective when sleep and eating habits are disruptive which they were on the trip.
The incident occurred during a solo part of the trip when the students were left alone to feed and take care of themselves. The suit claims that an instructor should have been assigned to watch the plaintiff to make sure he was safe. (Doesn’t that sort of eliminate the idea behind the solo?)
The attorney for the plaintiffs’ also stated “the university did not appoint an instructor to supervise Mance or send him for a medical check to determine whether he could handle the trip. He said Mance and his parents were unaware of the risks involved in the trip.”
This is a very sad case. A senior with only a few credits left to graduate in the field of outdoor recreation and education that falls victim to an accident in the field. On top of that the accident is disfiguring which is a double edged sword.
However a read of the article and possibly the complaint raises a lot of disturbing statements. You can reasonably assume that the plaintiff is over the age of 18, an adult able to make decisions about his own health and welfare. The complaint places all of the responsibility on the university. It was the universities responsibility to make sure he was safe, able to undertake the trip and able to physically handle the trip. Worse, it was the university’s responsibility to have the plaintiff determine if he was medically able to undertake the trip.
At what point do you take personal responsibility for your actions? We might have created some of these problems ourselves. We rely on outdoor programs to determine whether or not we can physically and medically undertake a trip. When in reality those people know nothing about us and are not physicians. The attempt to solve a problem as in this case, probably has created litigation. You and your doctor are the only ones who can make a decision as to whether you should undertake a trip. Your physician is the only person legally allowed and medically able to make that decision. For more information on this subject see: Legal Watch: Prescriptions and the Law, Legal Issues in First Aid #3: The prescription drug conundrum, Legal Issues in Wilderness First Aid: Value of various first aid certificates and training, Legal Issues in Wilderness First Aid.
For more articles on lawsuits against colleges for injuries in outdoor programs see: Case Brief: Release Protects Gonzaga University from Lawsuit Following Student Death, College successfully defends student high altitude fatality, Assumption of Risk and Inherent Risk in Higher Outdoor Education, and College loses suit by parents of deceased student from snow skiing class.
This is a sad case were the basis of the lawsuit seems to ride on the idea that someone else should have been responsible for me and my problems.
Lawsuit settles
Posted: June 26, 2008 Filed under: Skier v. Skier | Tags: Colorado, Denver Post, Lawsuit, Sports 1 Comment
A lawsuit we wrote about in “8 Year old boy sued in Colorado for ski collision” has settled according to the Denver Post
Boy’s family settles skiing suit . The Denver Post is reporting the suit settled for $25,000.
Banff Mountain Book Festival Competition
Posted: June 18, 2008 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Banff Leave a comment
Banff Mountain Book Festival Competition
|
|
Entry Deadline approaching!Banff Mountain Book
|
|
Historical Use v. Money, Control and Power
Posted: June 16, 2008 Filed under: Whitewater Rafting | Tags: Outdoor recreation, Outfitter, Pennsylvania, Raft, Raft guide, Recreation, River, Youghiogheny River Leave a comment
Image via Wikipedia
A summer camp in eastern Pennsylvania is suing the state of Pennsylvania over the right to run rafting trips on the Youghiogheny River. This statement does not seem like much at first however it is a very interesting legal argument about a state’s right to control commercial activities on its rivers. See SBTW sues DCNR for right to raft.
In this case the summer camp is Summer’s Best Two Weeks (SBTW), a Christian youth camp that has been running raft trips for its campers for more than 30 years. Several years ago the state licensed four outfitters as the only commercial rafting operators on the Youghiogheny River and ordered SBTW to quit running raft trips.
It is not evident from the information whether SBTW was offered a commercial permit.
The commercial rafting companies were probably excited because they knew they could pick up the $30,000 of rafting that SBTW would provide. Yet it seems no one in the state or the commercial operators understood basic economies: supply and demand. In this case SBTW did not hire one outfitter for one trip. The cost of hiring a commercial raft company to take the campers down the river was more than the summer camp could pay. Simple economics, rafting is fun, but at a price.
I have to admit a little bias in this case. While I was working on the rivers in the west my brother was a raft guide for SBTW.
We do not know the states reasoning for either excluding or not including SBTW. Was it to keep SBTW off the river or where they influenced by commercial companies to increase their income?
This story can be repeated on rivers and trails across the US. You can change out the word camp for college or any other non-profit group and see outfitters believing that by excluding them from being on the same area they can profit from the result. It never works. There is a ceiling on the amount these some groups can pay and in the case of college programs there are different goals. Commercial companies want to provide entertainment for their clients. Colleges may want to educate, teach, build teams or have numerous other goals.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m all for outfitters, they are my bread and butter. But the outdoor industry never looked at the economics of outdoor activities other than their own bottom line. Campers and their parents, college students and their parents, most groups and parents have a fixed amount of money they can be spent on the summer or an education. Once that amount of money is spent, no more activities are undertaken.
There scenario has been played out for years at various recreational hot spots and is going to boil over as the forest service notifies more colleges and universities that they are no longer allowed on USFS land without a permit or a commercial outfitter on a permit.
Taking a working vacation in the Grand Canyon
Posted: May 22, 2008 Filed under: Uncategorized 1 Comment
Goodbye for 20 days. I am going to work in the Grand Canyon for OARS rowing a boat and won’t be posting for a 20 days. See you when I get back.
EXPLORERS OF THE INFINITE
Posted: May 15, 2008 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Banff Mountain Book Festival, BASE jumping, Coffey, Dean Potter, Dick Rutan, Extreme sport, Lou Whittaker, Tanya Streeter Leave a commentJoin award winning author Maria Coffey for the launch of her new book, EXPLORERS OF THE INFINITE. During the launch Maria will be interviewed onstage by Princeton neuroscientist Dr. Sam Wang.
Cover via Amazon
May 30 at 8:00 p.m.
diver Tanya Streeter, long distance aviator Dick Rutan, and many other notable adventure athletes.
Maria Coffey is an award winning outdoors journalist and the author of numerous books, including the Where the Mountain Casts its Shadow, winner of the 2004 Jon Whyte Award for Mountain Literature at the Banff Mountain Book Festival. Coffey lives on Vancouver Island, where she and her husband run Hidden Places, an adventure travel company.
I write sometimes about emotions: anger, frustration or grief
Posted: May 14, 2008 Filed under: Climbing, Idaho | Tags: Anger, Family, Grief Loss and Bereavement, health, Idaho, Mental Health, Support group Leave a commentIn this case a family has taken their grief over the loss of a mountain climbing son and created an organization to assist in finding lost climbers. The Jon Francis Foundation was set up to help families search for missing loved ones.
Jon Francis was a 24 year old climber who was missing for a year on an Idahomountain.
Image via Wikipedia
Jon’s father is also writing a book detailing the year long search for his son.
In all the family has undertaken a lot of work to help others they do not know. It has very real and well founded goals of helping others. All of the work is driven over the loss of a loved one. Always remember when you are dealing in this situation you are dealing with more emotion than many people can deal with. This emotion does not fade like most, in some cases it may continue to build.
In this case it has resulted in helping others who may be in the same terrible situation.
Stillwater family turns grief into purpose
Personal Press Release
Posted: May 14, 2008 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Climbing, Mount Everest, Mountaineering, PBS, Public Broadcasting Service, Recreation 3 CommentsAs I mentioned in an earlier post, PBS tonight aired Storm Over Everest. I was asked to participate in a panel discussion on the ethics of guided climbing. You can see the panel discussion at Roundtable: The Ethics of Climbing.
Recreation Law 