States that do not Support the Use of a Release.

Posted: August 13, 2020 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Release (pre-injury contract not to sue) | Tags: Alaska, Arizona, Covenant not to sue, Louisiana, MISSISSIPPI, Montana, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Release, Utah, Virginia, Waiver, West Virginia | 1 Comment

Assumption of the risk is your best defense in these states.

These states do not allow a recreational business or program to use a release to stop litigation.

State	Citation	Issues/Article
Releases are Void
Louisiana	C.C. Art. 2004 (2005)	Any clause is null that, in advance, excludes or limits the liability of one party for intentional or gross fault that causes damage to the other party. Any clause is null that, in advance, excludes or limits the liability of one party for causing physical injury to the other party.
Virginia	Johnson’s Adm’x v. Richmond and Danville R.R. Co., 86 Va. 975, 11 S.E. 829 (1890)	Except for Equine Activities Chapter 62. Equine Activity Liability § 3.2-6202. Liability limited; liability actions prohibited
Oregon	Bagley v. Mt. Bachelor, Inc., dba Mt. Bachelor Ski and Summer Resort, 2014 Ore. LEXIS 994	Oregon Supreme Court finds release signed at ski area is void as a violation of public policy.
Use of a Release is Restricted
Arizona	Phelps v. Firebird Raceway, Inc., 2005 Ariz. LEXIS 53
New Mexico	Berlangieri v. Running Elk Corporation, 132 N.M. 332;2002 NMCA 60;48 P.3d 70;2002 N.M. App. 39;41 N.M. St. B. Bull. 25	State created Equine Liability Statute so no need for release
West Virginia	Kyriazis v. University of West Virginia; 192 W. Va. 60; 450 S.E.2d 649; 1994 W. Va. LEXIS 161
Use of Releases is Probably Void
Connecticut	Hanks v. Powder Ridge Restaurant Corp., 276 Conn. 314, 885 A.2d 734 (2005) and Reardon v. Windswept Farm, LLC, Et Al., 280 Conn. 153; 905 A.2d 1156; 2006 Conn. LEXIS 330
Mississippi	Turnbough v. Ladner, 754 So. 2d 467; 1999 Miss. LEXIS 375	Mississippi Supreme Court makes it almost impossible to write a release that is enforceable because the court does not give direction as to what it wants.
Wisconsin	Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Center, 2005 WI 4; 2005 Wisc. LEXIS 2	Wisconsin decision has left the status of release law in Wisconsin in jeopardy
Wisconsin	Roberts v. T.H.E. Insurance Company, et al., 2016 WI 20; 2016 Wisc. LEXIS 121	Wisconsin Supreme Court voids another release because it violates public policy. Public Policy as defined in Wisconsin requires the ability to bargain before signing the release.
Vermont	Dalury v. S-K-I, Ltd, 164 Vt 329; 670 A.2d 795; 1995 Vt. Lexis 127
Specific uses of Releases are Void
Alaska	Sec. 05.45.120(a). Use of liability releases	A ski area operator may not require a skier to sign an agreement releasing the ski area operator from liability in exchange for the right to ride a ski area tramway and ski in the ski area. A release that violates this subsection is void and may not be enforced.
Hawaii	King v. CJM Country Stables, 315 F. Supp. 2d 1061, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7511 (D. Haw. 2004)	Found that Hawaii statute § 663-1.54. Recreational activity liability prevented the use of a release
New York	General Obligation Law § 5-326. Agreements exempting pools, gymnasiums, places of public amusement or recreation and similar establishments from liability for negligence void and unenforceable	Every covenant, agreement or understanding in or in connection with, or collateral to, any contract, membership application, ticket of admission or similar writing, entered into between the owner or operator of any pool, gymnasium, place of amusement or recreation, or similar establishment and the user of such facilities, pursuant to which such owner or operator receives a fee or other compensation for the use of such facilities, which exempts the said owner or operator from liability for damages caused by or resulting from the negligence of the owner, operator or person in charge of such establishment, or their agents, servants or employees, shall be deemed to be void as against public policy and wholly unenforceable.
Not Sure Where the Supreme Court Stands at This Time
Montana	MCA § 27-1-701	Liability for negligence as well as willful acts. Except as otherwise provided by law, everyone is responsible not only for the results of his willful acts but also for an injury occasioned to another by his want of ordinary care or skill in the management of his property or person except so far as the latter has willfully or by want of ordinary care brought the injury upon himself. However, Montana passed the Montana Recreation Responsibility Act which now allows the use of a release for Recreational activities. This Act has not been reviewed by the courts.
Utah	Decisions for Releases Utah’s decision upholds a release for simple negligence but not gross negligence in a ski accident Pearce v. Utah Athletic Foundation, 2008 UT 13; 179 P.3d 760; 597 Utah Adv. Rep. 13; 2008 Utah LEXIS 16 Decisions Against Releases Utah Supreme Court Reverses long position on releases in a very short period of time	Utah seems to be adopting a position against releases. So far, they are invalidating releases if the legislature has created a statute protecting an activity. However, they have had several decisions supporting releases. Good luck

What do you think? Leave a comment.

Twitter: RecreationLaw

Facebook: Rec.Law.Now

Facebook Page: Outdoor Recreation & Adventure Travel Law

#AdventureTourism, #AdventureTravelLaw, #AdventureTravelLawyer, #AttorneyatLaw, #Backpacking, #BicyclingLaw, #Camps, #ChallengeCourse, #ChallengeCourseLaw, #ChallengeCourseLawyer, #CyclingLaw, #FitnessLaw, #FitnessLawyer, #Hiking, #HumanPowered, #HumanPoweredRecreation, #IceClimbing, #JamesHMoss, #JimMoss, #Law, #Mountaineering, #Negligence, #OutdoorLaw, #OutdoorRecreationLaw, #OutsideLaw, #OutsideLawyer, #RecLaw, #Rec-Law, #RecLawBlog, #Rec-LawBlog, #RecLawyer, #RecreationalLawyer, #RecreationLaw, #RecreationLawBlog, #RecreationLawcom, #Recreation-Lawcom, #Recreation-Law.com, #RiskManagement, #RockClimbing, #RockClimbingLawyer, #RopesCourse, #RopesCourseLawyer, #SkiAreas, #Skiing, #SkiLaw, #Snowboarding, #SummerCamp, #Tourism, #TravelLaw, #YouthCamps, #ZipLineLawyer, #Montana, #Louisiana, #Virginia, #New York, #Hawaii, #Alaska, New York, Hawaii, Oregon, Louisiana, Montana, Virginia, New Mexico, Arizona, Alaska, Vermont, Wisconsin, Connecticut, , #Vermont, #Wisconsin, #Connecticut, #New Mexico, #Arizona, #West Virginia, Oregon

States that allow a parent to sign away a minor’s right to sue.

Posted: March 12, 2019 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Minors, Youth, Children, Release (pre-injury contract not to sue) | Tags: #AZ, #FL, #OH, #Zivich, AK, Alaska, Arizona, Atkins, Bismark Park District, CA, California, Cascade Mountain, City Of Coral Gables, City of Newton, CO, Colorado, Equine, Equine Safety Act, Florida, Global Travel Marketing, Gonzalez, Hohe, MA, Massachusetts, McPhail, Mentor Soccer Club, Minnesota, Minnesota Baseball Instructional School, Minor, minors, MN, Moore, NC, ND, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Osborn, Parent Signature, Right to Sue, San Diego, San Diego Unified School District, Sharon, Shea, Swimwest Family Fitness Center, UT, Utah, WI, Wisconsin | Leave a comment

If your state is not listed here, you should assume a parent cannot waive a minor’s right to sue in your state.

State	By Statute	Restrictions
Alaska	Alaska: Sec. 09.65.292	Sec. 05.45.120 does not allow using a release by ski areas for ski injuries
Arizona	ARS § 12-553	Limited to Equine Activities
Colorado	C.R.S. §§13-22-107
Florida	Florida Statute § 744.301 (3)	Florida statute that allows a parent to release a minor’s right to sue
Virginia	Chapter 62. Equine Activity Liability § 3.2-6202. Liability limited; liability actions prohibited	Allows a parent to sign a release for a minor for equine activities
Utah	78B-4-203. Limitations on Liability for Equine and Livestock Activities	Limited to Equine Activities (b) providing a document or release for the participant, or the participant’s legal guardian if the participant is a minor, to sign.
	By Case Law
California	Hohe v. San Diego Unified Sch. Dist., 224 Cal.App.3d 1559, 274 Cal.Rptr. 647 (1990)
Florida	Global Travel Marketing, Inc v. Shea, 2005 Fla. LEXIS 1454	Allows a release signed by a parent to require arbitration of the minor’s claims
Florida	Gonzalez v. City of Coral Gables, 871 So.2d 1067, 29 Fla. L. Weekly D1147	Release can be used for volunteer activities and by government entities
Maryland	BJ’s Wholesale Club, Inc. v. Rosen, 435 Md. 714; 80 A.3d 345; 2013 Md. LEXIS 897	Maryland top court allows a parent to sign away a minor’s right to sue. Release was not fantastic, but good enough.
Massachusetts	Sharon v. City of Newton, 437 Mass. 99; 769 N.E.2d 738; 2002 Mass. LEXIS 384
Minnesota	Moore vs. Minnesota Baseball Instructional School, 2009 Minn. App. Unpub. LEXIS 299
North Dakota	McPhail v. Bismarck Park District, 2003 ND 4; 655 N.W.2d 411; 2003 N.D. LEXIS 3	North Dakota decision allows a parent to sign away a minor’s right to sue
Ohio	Zivich v. Mentor Soccer Club, Inc., 696 N.E.2d 201, 82 Ohio St.3d 367 (1998)	Ohio Appellate decision upholds the use of a release for a minor for a commercial activity
Wisconsin	Osborn v. Cascade Mountain, Inc., 655 N.W.2d 546, 259 Wis. 2d 481, 2002 Wisc. App. LEXIS 1216, 2003 WI App 1	However the decision in Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Center, 2005 WI 4; 2005 Wisc. LEXIS 2 may void all releases in the state
	On the Edge, but not enough to really rely on	Decisions are by the Federal District Courts and only preliminary motions
North Carolina	Kelly v. United States of America, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89741	North Carolina may allow a parent to sign away a minor’s right to sue for injuries when the minor is engaged in non-profit activities sponsored by schools, volunteers, or community organizations
New York	DiFrancesco v. Win-Sum Ski Corp., Holiday Valley, Inc., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39695	New York Federal Magistrate in a Motion in Limine, hearing holds the New York Skier Safety Statute allows a parent to sign away a minor’s right to sue.

What do you think? Leave a comment.

Twitter: RecreationLaw

Facebook: Rec.Law.Now

Facebook Page: Outdoor Recreation & Adventure Travel Law

Blog:
www.recreation-law.com

#AdventureTourism, #AdventureTravelLaw, #AdventureTravelLawyer, #AttorneyatLaw, #Backpacking, #BicyclingLaw, #Camps, #ChallengeCourse, #ChallengeCourseLaw, #ChallengeCourseLawyer, #CyclingLaw, #FitnessLaw, #FitnessLawyer, #Hiking, #HumanPowered, #HumanPoweredRecreation, #IceClimbing, #JamesHMoss, #JimMoss, #Law, #Mountaineering, #Negligence, #OutdoorLaw, #OutdoorRecreationLaw, #OutsideLaw, #OutsideLawyer, #RecLaw, #Rec-Law, #RecLawBlog, #Rec-LawBlog, #RecLawyer, #RecreationalLawyer, #RecreationLaw, #RecreationLawBlog, #RecreationLawcom, #Recreation-Lawcom, #Recreation-Law.com, #RiskManagement, #RockClimbing, #RockClimbingLawyer, #RopesCourse, #RopesCourseLawyer, #SkiAreas, #Skiing, #SkiLaw, #Snowboarding, #SummerCamp, #Tourism, #TravelLaw, #YouthCamps, #ZipLineLawyer, minor, release, Parent Signature, NC, North Carolina, Alaska, AK, AZ, Arizona, CO, Colorado, Florida, FL, CA, California, MA, Massachusetts, Minnesota, MN, ND, North Dakota, OH, Ohio, WI, Wisconsin, Hohe, San Diego, San Diego Unified School District, Global Travel Marketing, Shea, Gonzalez, City Of Coral Gables, Sharon, City of Newton, Moore, Minnesota Baseball Instructional School, McPhail, Bismark Park District, Zivich, Mentor Soccer Club, Osborn, Cascade Mountain, Atkins, Swimwest Family Fitness Center, Minor, Minors, Right to Sue, Utah, UT, Equine, Equine Safety Act, North Carolina, New York,

States that allow a parent to sign away a minor’s right to sue

Posted: June 7, 2017 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Alaska, California, Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Minors, Youth, Children, North Dakota, Release (pre-injury contract not to sue) | Tags: #AZ, #FL, #OH, #Zivich, AK, Alaska, Arizona, Atkins, Bismark Park District, CA, California, Cascade Mountain, City Of Coral Gables, City of Newton, CO, Colorado, Equine, Equine Safety Act, Florida, Global Travel Marketing, Gonzalez, Hohe, MA, Massachusetts, McPhail, Mentor Soccer Club, Minnesota, Minnesota Baseball Instructional School, Minor, minors, MN, Moore, NC, ND, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Osborn, Parent Signature, Release, Right to Sue, San Diego, San Diego Unified School District, Sharon, Shea, Swimwest Family Fitness Center, UT, Utah, WI, Wisconsin | Leave a comment

If your state is not listed here, you should assume a parent cannot waive a minor’s right to sue in your state.

State	By Statute	Restrictions
Alaska	Alaska: Sec. 09.65.292	Sec. 05.45.120 does not allow using a release by ski areas for ski injuries
Arizona	ARS § 12-553	Limited to Equine Activities
Colorado	C.R.S. §§13-22-107
Florida	Florida Statute § 744.301 (3)	Florida statute that allows a parent to release a minor’s right to sue
Virginia	Chapter 62. Equine Activity Liability § 3.2-6202. Liability limited; liability actions prohibited	Allows a parent to sign a release for a minor for equine activities
Utah	78B-4-203. Limitations on Liability for Equine and Livestock Activities	Limited to Equine Activities (b) providing a document or release for the participant, or the participant’s legal guardian if the participant is a minor, to sign.
	By Case Law
California	Hohe v. San Diego Unified Sch. Dist., 224 Cal.App.3d 1559, 274 Cal.Rptr. 647 (1990)
Florida	Global Travel Marketing, Inc v. Shea, 2005 Fla. LEXIS 1454	Allows a release signed by a parent to require arbitration of the minor’s claims
Florida	Gonzalez v. City of Coral Gables, 871 So.2d 1067, 29 Fla. L. Weekly D1147	Release can be used for volunteer activities and by government entities
Maryland	BJ’s Wholesale Club, Inc. v. Rosen, 435 Md. 714; 80 A.3d 345; 2013 Md. LEXIS 897	Maryland top court allows a parent to sign away a minor’s right to sue. Release was not fantastic, but good enough.
Massachusetts	Sharon v. City of Newton, 437 Mass. 99; 769 N.E.2d 738; 2002 Mass. LEXIS 384
Minnesota	Moore vs. Minnesota Baseball Instructional School, 2009 Minn. App. Unpub. LEXIS 299
North Dakota	McPhail v. Bismarck Park District, 2003 ND 4; 655 N.W.2d 411; 2003 N.D. LEXIS 3	North Dakota decision allows a parent to sign away a minor’s right to sue
Ohio	Zivich v. Mentor Soccer Club, Inc., 696 N.E.2d 201, 82 Ohio St.3d 367 (1998)	Ohio Appellate decision upholds the use of a release for a minor for a commercial activity
Wisconsin	Osborn v. Cascade Mountain, Inc., 655 N.W.2d 546, 259 Wis. 2d 481, 2002 Wisc. App. LEXIS 1216, 2003 WI App 1	However the decision in Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Center, 2005 WI 4; 2005 Wisc. LEXIS 2 may void all releases in the state
	On the Edge, but not enough to really rely on	Decisions are by the Federal District Courts and only preliminary motions
North Carolina	Kelly v. United States of America, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89741	North Carolina may allow a parent to sign away a minor’s right to sue for injuries when the minor is engaged in non-profit activities sponsored by schools, volunteers, or community organizations
New York	DiFrancesco v. Win-Sum Ski Corp., Holiday Valley, Inc., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39695	New York Federal Magistrate in a Motion in Limine, hearing holds the New York Skier Safety Statute allows a parent to sign away a minor’s right to sue.

What do you think? Leave a comment.

Twitter: RecreationLaw

Facebook: Rec.Law.Now

Facebook Page: Outdoor Recreation & Adventure Travel Law

Blog: http://www.recreation-law.com

Mobile Site: http://m.recreation-law.com

#AdventureTourism, #AdventureTravelLaw, #AdventureTravelLawyer, #AttorneyatLaw, #Backpacking, #BicyclingLaw, #Camps, #ChallengeCourse, #ChallengeCourseLaw, #ChallengeCourseLawyer, #CyclingLaw, #FitnessLaw, #FitnessLawyer, #Hiking, #HumanPowered, #HumanPoweredRecreation, #IceClimbing, #JamesHMoss, #JimMoss, #Law, #Mountaineering, #Negligence, #OutdoorLaw, #OutdoorRecreationLaw, #OutsideLaw, #OutsideLawyer, #RecLaw, #Rec-Law, #RecLawBlog, #Rec-LawBlog, #RecLawyer, #RecreationalLawyer, #RecreationLaw, #RecreationLawBlog, #RecreationLawcom, #Recreation-Lawcom, #Recreation-Law.com, #RiskManagement, #RockClimbing, #RockClimbingLawyer, #RopesCourse, #RopesCourseLawyer, #SkiAreas, #Skiing, #SkiLaw, #Snowboarding, #SummerCamp, #Tourism, #TravelLaw, #YouthCamps, #ZipLineLawyer, minor, release, Parent Signature, NC, North Carolina, Alaska, AK, AZ, Arizona, CO, Colorado, Florida, FL, CA, California, MA, Massachusetts, Minnesota, MN, ND, North Dakota, OH, Ohio, WI, Wisconsin, Hohe, San Diego, San Diego Unified School District, Global Travel Marketing, Shea, Gonzalez, City Of Coral Gables, Sharon, City of Newton, Moore, Minnesota Baseball Instructional School, McPhail, Bismark Park District, Zivich, Mentor Soccer Club, Osborn, Cascade Mountain, Atkins, Swimwest Family Fitness Center, Minor, Minors, Right to Sue, Utah, UT, Equine, Equine Safety Act, North Carolina, New York,

States that do not Support the Use of a Release

Posted: June 1, 2016 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Release (pre-injury contract not to sue) | Tags: Alaska, Arizona, Connecticut, Hawaii, Louisiana, Montana, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin | Leave a comment

The most changes in this form have occurred in the last year over the last ten years.

Assumption of the risk is your best defense in these states

These states do not allow a recreational business or program to use a release to stop litigation.

State	Citation	Issues/Article
Releases are Void
Louisiana	C.C. Art. 2004 (2005)	Any clause is null that, in advance, excludes or limits the liability of one party for intentional or gross fault that causes damage to the other party. Any clause is null that, in advance, excludes or limits the liability of one party for causing physical injury to the other party.
Montana	MCA § 27-1-701	Liability for negligence as well as willful acts. Except as otherwise provided by law, everyone is responsible not only for the results of his willful acts but also for an injury occasioned to another by his want of ordinary care or skill in the management of his property or person except so far as the latter has willfully or by want of ordinary care brought the injury upon himself.
Virginia	Johnson’s Adm’x v. Richmond and Danville R.R. Co., 86 Va. 975, 11 S.E. 829 (1890)	Except for Equine Activities Chapter 62. Equine Activity Liability § 3.2-6202. Liability limited; liability actions prohibited
Oregon	Bagley v. Mt. Bachelor, Inc., dba Mt. Bachelor Ski and Summer Resort, 2014 Ore. LEXIS 994	Oregon Supreme Court finds release signed at ski area is void as a violation of public policy.
Use of a Release is Restricted
Arizona	Phelps v. Firebird Raceway, Inc., 2005 Ariz. LEXIS 53
New Mexico	Berlangieri v. Running Elk Corporation, 132 N.M. 332;2002 NMCA 60;48 P.3d 70;2002 N.M. App. 39;41 N.M. St. B. Bull. 25	State created Equine Liability Statute so no need for release
West Virginia	Kyriazis v. University of West Virginia; 192 W. Va. 60; 450 S.E.2d 649; 1994 W. Va. LEXIS 161
Use of Releases is Probably Void
Connecticut	Hanks v. Powder Ridge Restaurant Corp., 276 Conn. 314, 885 A.2d 734 (2005) and Reardon v. Windswept Farm, LLC, Et Al., 280 Conn. 153; 905 A.2d 1156; 2006 Conn. LEXIS 330
Mississippi	Turnbough v. Ladner, 754 So. 2d 467; 1999 Miss. LEXIS 375	Mississippi Supreme Court makes it almost impossible to write a release that is enforceable because the court does not give direction as to what it wants.
Wisconsin	Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Center, 2005 WI 4; 2005 Wisc. LEXIS 2	Wisconsin decision has left the status of release law in Wisconsin in jeopardy
Wisconsin	Roberts v. T.H.E. Insurance Company, et al., 2016 WI 20; 2016 Wisc. LEXIS 121	Wisconsin Supreme Court voids another release because it violates public policy. Public Policy as defined in Wisconsin requires the ability to bargain before signing the release.
Vermont	Dalury v. S-K-I, Ltd, 164 Vt 329; 670 A.2d 795; 1995 Vt. Lexis 127
Specific uses of Releases are Void
Alaska	Sec. 05.45.120(a). Use of liability releases	A ski area operator may not require a skier to sign an agreement releasing the ski area operator from liability in exchange for the right to ride a ski area tramway and ski in the ski area. A release that violates this subsection is void and may not be enforced.
Hawaii	King v. CJM Country Stables, 315 F. Supp. 2d 1061, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7511 (D. Haw. 2004)	Found that Hawaii statute § 663-1.54. Recreational activity liability prevented the use of a release
New York	General Obligation Law § 5-326. Agreements exempting pools, gymnasiums, places of public amusement or recreation and similar establishments from liability for negligence void and unenforceable	Every covenant, agreement or understanding in or in connection with, or collateral to, any contract, membership application, ticket of admission or similar writing, entered into between the owner or operator of any pool, gymnasium, place of amusement or recreation, or similar establishment and the user of such facilities, pursuant to which such owner or operator receives a fee or other compensation for the use of such facilities, which exempts the said owner or operator from liability for damages caused by or resulting from the negligence of the owner, operator or person in charge of such establishment, or their agents, servants or employees, shall be deemed to be void as against public policy and wholly unenforceable.

What do you think? Leave a comment.

Twitter: RecreationLaw

Facebook: Rec.Law.Now

Facebook Page: Outdoor Recreation & Adventure Travel Law

#AdventureTourism, #AdventureTravelLaw, #AdventureTravelLawyer, #AttorneyatLaw, #Backpacking, #BicyclingLaw, #Camps, #ChallengeCourse, #ChallengeCourseLaw, #ChallengeCourseLawyer, #CyclingLaw, #FitnessLaw, #FitnessLawyer, #Hiking, #HumanPowered, #HumanPoweredRecreation, #IceClimbing, #JamesHMoss, #JimMoss, #Law, #Mountaineering, #Negligence, #OutdoorLaw, #OutdoorRecreationLaw, #OutsideLaw, #OutsideLawyer, #RecLaw, #Rec-Law, #RecLawBlog, #Rec-LawBlog, #RecLawyer, #RecreationalLawyer, #RecreationLaw, #RecreationLawBlog, #RecreationLawcom, #Recreation-Lawcom, #Recreation-Law.com, #RiskManagement, #RockClimbing, #RockClimbingLawyer, #RopesCourse, #RopesCourseLawyer, #SkiAreas, #Skiing, #SkiLaw, #Snowboarding, #SummerCamp, #Tourism, #TravelLaw, #YouthCamps, #ZipLineLawyer, #Montana, #Louisiana, #Virginia, #New York, #Hawaii, #Alaska, New York, Hawaii, Oregon, Louisiana, Montana, Virginia, New Mexico, Arizona, Alaska, Vermont, Wisconsin, Connecticut, #Vermont, #Wisconsin, #Connecticut, #New Mexico, #Arizona, #West Virginia, Oregon

States that do not Support the Use of a Release

Posted: May 11, 2016 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Release (pre-injury contract not to sue) | Tags: Alaska, Arizona, Connecticut, Hawaii, Louisiana, Montana, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin | Leave a comment

Assumption of the risk is your best defense in these states

These states do not allow a recreational business or program to use a release to stop litigation.

State	Citation	Issues/Article
Releases are Void
Louisiana	C.C. Art. 2004 (2005)	Any clause is null that, in advance, excludes or limits the liability of one party for intentional or gross fault that causes damage to the other party. Any clause is null that, in advance, excludes or limits the liability of one party for causing physical injury to the other party.
Montana	MCA § 27-1-701	Liability for negligence as well as willful acts. Except as otherwise provided by law, everyone is responsible not only for the results of his willful acts but also for an injury occasioned to another by his want of ordinary care or skill in the management of his property or person except so far as the latter has willfully or by want of ordinary care brought the injury upon himself.
Virginia	Johnson’s Adm’x v. Richmond and Danville R.R. Co., 86 Va. 975, 11 S.E. 829 (1890)	Except for Equine Activities Chapter 62. Equine Activity Liability § 3.2-6202. Liability limited; liability actions prohibited
Oregon	Bagley v. Mt. Bachelor, Inc., dba Mt. Bachelor Ski and Summer Resort, 2014 Ore. LEXIS 994	Oregon Supreme Court finds release signed at ski area is void as a violation of public policy.
Use of a Release is Restricted
Arizona	Phelps v. Firebird Raceway, Inc., 2005 Ariz. LEXIS 53
New Mexico	Berlangieri v. Running Elk Corporation, 132 N.M. 332;2002 NMCA 60;48 P.3d 70;2002 N.M. App. 39;41 N.M. St. B. Bull. 25	State created Equine Liability Statute so no need for release
West Virginia	Kyriazis v. University of West Virginia; 192 W. Va. 60; 450 S.E.2d 649; 1994 W. Va. LEXIS 161
Use of Releases is Probably Void
Connecticut	Hanks v. Powder Ridge Restaurant Corp., 276 Conn. 314, 885 A.2d 734 (2005) and Reardon v. Windswept Farm, LLC, Et Al., 280 Conn. 153; 905 A.2d 1156; 2006 Conn. LEXIS 330
Wisconsin	Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Center, 2005 WI 4; 2005 Wisc. LEXIS 2	Wisconsin decision has left the status of release law in Wisconsin in jeopardy
Wisconsin	Roberts v. T.H.E. Insurance Company, et al., 2016 WI 20; 2016 Wisc. LEXIS 121	Wisconsin Supreme Court voids another release because it violates public policy. Public Policy as defined in Wisconsin requires the ability to bargain before signing the release.
Vermont	Dalury v. S-K-I, Ltd, 164 Vt 329; 670 A.2d 795; 1995 Vt. Lexis 127
Specific uses of Releases are Void
Alaska	Sec. 05.45.120(a). Use of liability releases	A ski area operator may not require a skier to sign an agreement releasing the ski area operator from liability in exchange for the right to ride a ski area tramway and ski in the ski area. A release that violates this subsection is void and may not be enforced.
Hawaii	King v. CJM Country Stables, 315 F. Supp. 2d 1061, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7511 (D. Haw. 2004)	Found that Hawaii statute § 663-1.54. Recreational activity liability prevented the use of a release
New York	General Obligation Law § 5-326. Agreements exempting pools, gymnasiums, places of public amusement or recreation and similar establishments from liability for negligence void and unenforceable	Every covenant, agreement or understanding in or in connection with, or collateral to, any contract, membership application, ticket of admission or similar writing, entered into between the owner or operator of any pool, gymnasium, place of amusement or recreation, or similar establishment and the user of such facilities, pursuant to which such owner or operator receives a fee or other compensation for the use of such facilities, which exempts the said owner or operator from liability for damages caused by or resulting from the negligence of the owner, operator or person in charge of such establishment, or their agents, servants or employees, shall be deemed to be void as against public policy and wholly unenforceable.

What do you think? Leave a comment.

Twitter: RecreationLaw

Facebook: Rec.Law.Now

Facebook Page: Outdoor Recreation & Adventure Travel Law

Arizona Voters Overwhelmingly Support Grand Canyon National Monument, New Poll Finds

Posted: March 3, 2016 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Arizona, Grand Canyon, Grand Canyon National Park, National Park Service | Leave a comment

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/arizona-voters-overwhelmingly-support-grand-canyon-national-monument-new-poll-finds-8071711

Arizona Voters Overwhelmingly Support Grand Canyon National Monument, New Poll Finds

EXPAND

Sierralara/Shutterstock

Flying in the face of those who claim it would be unpopular to give the greater Grand Canyon watershed national monument status, a new nonpartisan poll finds that not only is there tremendous support for it but that it cuts across geographical and political lines.

“The results were overwhelming, and they demonstrated both strong and broad support [in] Arizona,” says Dave Metz of the research firm Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates, which polled hundreds of Arizona voters in January.

The pollsters discovered that 80 percent of Arizona voters support or strongly support the Grand Canyon National Heritage Monument, as outlined in a bill U.S. Congressman Raul Grijalva submitted to the U.S. House of Representatives last year.

Grijalva brought together a broad coalition of native tribes, environmental groups, and local stakeholders to design the bill, which if passed, would permanently protect 1.7 million acres of land and prevent any new uranium mines.

Courtesy of FM3

“More than half of Arizonans say more needs to be done to protect air, land, and water around the Grand Canyon, and they clearly see establishing that monument as an effective way of reaching that goal,” Metz says, adding that “the sentiment that the area around the Grand Canyon needs protection has grown over time.”

A similar poll conducted in 2009 found only 43 percent of people supported it, and a poll last year found that 73 percent of Arizonans support it.

Courtesy of Grand Canyon Trust

Local native tribes and environmental groups have talked about wanting national monument status for the Grand Canyon for years, and Grijalva’s efforts to make it a reality have solicited nothing short of a political firestorm among enemies of the bill.

Leading the charge is U.S. Congressman Paul Gosar, who has railed against the monument proposal for months. Gosar claims it would cost hundreds of jobs, destroy the local economy, and hinder sportsmen or other recreational users of the area.

U.S. Congressman Raul Grijalva

Courtesy of Raul Grijalva

In an interview earlier this year, Grijalva told New Times that Gosar’s “opposition is based on myths” and that he “needs to own up to the fact that he’s on the fringe of every public-land argument we have in this country.”

The benefit of this, Grijalva explained, helps “put the opposition of some in context with many . . . It’s important to deal with what the public wants and thinks, as opposed to letting this discussion be mired in half-truths, false information, and the sheer cry from opposition that doesn’t represent the vast majority of the people in Arizona.”

Both Metz and Grijalva say they were impressed by the broad appeal of the monument, as men and women across the state expressed support for the idea of national monuments in general and the Grand Canyon monument in particular.

According to the poll results, there is support for the Grand Canyon monument among:

76 percent of men and 84 percent of women,
65 percent of registered Republicans, 84 percent of independents, and 95 percent of Democrats,
78 percent of people living in Congressional District 1, which is where the proposed monument would be,
79 percent of white voters, 86 percent of Latino voters, and 87 percent of all voters of color, including Native Americans,
81 percent of people living in urban areas, 83 percent in suburban areas, 79 percent in small towns, and 73 percent in rural areas,
And 76 percent of hunters and anglers.

Joe Jiang/Flickr

Unlike past polls, this most recent one also asked voters how their opinion of elected officials could be influenced by a vote for or against the monument:

“Voters were three times as likely to say they would support a politician who backed the establishment of the monument,” Metz says. “So not only do voters indicate that it’s a good idea, but they say that they’ll be more supportive of members of Congress who act to make the monument reality.”

Last year, Grijalva, along with Arizona U.S. Representatives Ann Kirkpatrick and Ruben Gallego, authored a public letter detailing their support for the monument. In the months since, however, Kirkpatrick has distanced herself from that stance, explaining that she’s still considering the statements of many local stakeholders.

But with public opinion clearly on his side, Grijalva says he’s ready to continue the fight: “As we go forward, we have strong support from the people in Arizona, the first nations most affected by this monument designation, [as well as] hunters and anglers and people that use our public land.

“I think we can start to put aside the shrill debate that occurs on this issue” and start taking “the steps to build public support.”

States that do not Support the Use of a Release

Posted: February 4, 2015 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Release (pre-injury contract not to sue) | Tags: Alaska, Arizona, Connecticut, Covenant not to sue, Hawaii, Louisiana, Montana, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Release, Vermont, Virginia, Waiver, West Virginia, Wisconsin | Leave a comment

Assumption of the risk is your best defense in these states

These states do not allow a recreational business or program to use a release to stop litigation.

State	Citation	Issues
Releases are Void
Louisiana	C.C. Art. 2004 (2005)	Any clause is null that, in advance, excludes or limits the liability of one party for intentional or gross fault that causes damage to the other party. Any clause is null that, in advance, excludes or limits the liability of one party for causing physical injury to the other party.
Montana	MCA § 27-1-701	Liability for negligence as well as willful acts. Except as otherwise provided by law, everyone is responsible not only for the results of his willful acts but also for an injury occasioned to another by his want of ordinary care or skill in the management of his property or person except so far as the latter has willfully or by want of ordinary care brought the injury upon himself.
Virginia	Johnson’s Adm’x v. Richmond and Danville R.R. Co., 86 Va. 975, 11 S.E. 829 (1890)	Except for Equine Activities Chapter 62. Equine Activity Liability § 3.2-6202. Liability limited; liability actions prohibited
Use of a Release is Restricted
Arizona	Phelps v. Firebird Raceway, Inc., 2005 Ariz. LEXIS 53
New Mexico	Berlangieri v. Running Elk Corporation, 132 N.M. 332;2002 NMCA 60;48 P.3d 70;2002 N.M. App. 39;41 N.M. St. B. Bull. 25
West Virginia	Kyriazis v. University of West Virginia; 192 W. Va. 60; 450 S.E.2d 649; 1994 W. Va. LEXIS 161
Use of Releases is Probably Void
Connecticut	Hanks v. Powder Ridge Restaurant Corp., 276 Conn. 314, 885 A.2d 734 (2005) and Reardon v. Windswept Farm, LLC, Et Al., 280 Conn. 153; 905 A.2d 1156; 2006 Conn. LEXIS 330
Oregon	Bagley v. Mt. Bachelor, Inc., dba Mt. Bachelor Ski and Summer Resort, 2014 Ore. LEXIS 994	Oregon Supreme Court finds release signed at ski area is void as a violation of public policy.
Wisconsin	Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Center, 2005 WI 4; 2005 Wisc. LEXIS 2	Wisconsin decision has left the status of release law in Wisconsin in jeopardy
Vermont	Dalury v. S-K-I, Ltd, 164 Vt 329; 670 A.2d 795; 1995 Vt. Lexis 127
Specific uses of Releases are Void
Alaska	Sec. 05.45.120(a). Use of liability releases	A ski area operator may not require a skier to sign an agreement releasing the ski area operator from liability in exchange for the right to ride a ski area tramway and ski in the ski area. A release that violates this subsection is void and may not be enforced.
Hawaii	King v. CJM Country Stables, 315 F. Supp. 2d 1061, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7511 (D. Haw. 2004)	Found that Hawaii statute § 663-1.54. Recreational activity liability prevented the use of a release
New York	General Obligation Law § 5-326. Agreements exempting pools, gymnasiums, places of public amusement or recreation and similar establishments from liability for negligence void and unenforceable	Every covenant, agreement or understanding in or in connection with, or collateral to, any contract, membership application, ticket of admission or similar writing, entered into between the owner or operator of any pool, gymnasium, place of amusement or recreation, or similar establishment and the user of such facilities, pursuant to which such owner or operator receives a fee or other compensation for the use of such facilities, which exempts the said owner or operator from liability for damages caused by or resulting from the negligence of the owner, operator or person in charge of such establishment, or their agents, servants or employees, shall be deemed to be void as against public policy and wholly unenforceable.

What do you think? Leave a comment.

Twitter: RecreationLaw

Facebook: Rec.Law.Now

Facebook Page: Outdoor Recreation & Adventure Travel Law

States that allow a parent to sign away a minor’s right to sue

Posted: November 12, 2014 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Alaska, California, Colorado, Maryland, Minnesota, Minors, Youth, Children, Ohio, Release (pre-injury contract not to sue), South Dakota | Tags: #AZ, #FL, #OH, #Zivich, AK, Alaska, Arizona, Atkins, Bismark Park District, CA, California, Cascade Mountain, City Of Coral Gables, City of Newton, CO, Colorado, Equine, Equine Safety Act, Florida, Global Travel Marketing, Gonzalez, Hohe, MA, Massachusetts, McPhail, Mentor Soccer Club, Minnesota, Minnesota Baseball Instructional School, Minor, minors, MN, Moore, NC, ND, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Osborn, Parent Signature, Release, Right to Sue, San Diego, San Diego Unified School District, Sharon, Shea, Swimwest Family Fitness Center, UT, Utah, WI, Wisconsin | 1 Comment

If your state is not listed here, you should assume a parent cannot waive a minor’s right to sue in your state.

State	By Statute	Restrictions
Alaska	Alaska: Sec. 09.65.292	Sec. 05.45.120 does not allow using a release by ski areas for ski injuries
Arizona	ARS § 12-553	Limited to Equine Activities
Colorado	C.R.S. §§13-22-107
Florida	Florida Statute § 744.301 (3)	Florida statute that allows a parent to release a minor’s right to sue
Virginia	Chapter 62. Equine Activity Liability § 3.2-6202. Liability limited; liability actions prohibited	Allows a parent to sign a release for a minor for equine activities
Utah	78B-4-203. Limitations on Liability for Equine and Livestock Activities	Limited to Equine Activities (b) providing a document or release for the participant, or the participant’s legal guardian if the participant is a minor, to sign.
	By Case Law
California	Hohe v. San Diego Unified Sch. Dist., 224 Cal.App.3d 1559, 274 Cal.Rptr. 647 (1990)
Florida	Global Travel Marketing, Inc v. Shea, 2005 Fla. LEXIS 1454	Allows a release signed by a parent to require arbitration of the minor’s claims
Florida	Gonzalez v. City of Coral Gables, 871 So.2d 1067, 29 Fla. L. Weekly D1147	Release can be used for volunteer activities and by government entities
Massachusetts	Sharon v. City of Newton, 437 Mass. 99; 769 N.E.2d 738; 2002 Mass. LEXIS 384
Minnesota	Moore vs. Minnesota Baseball Instructional School, 2009 Minn. App. Unpub. LEXIS 299
North Dakota	McPhail v. Bismarck Park District, 2003 ND 4; 655 N.W.2d 411; 2003 N.D. LEXIS 3
Ohio	Zivich v. Mentor Soccer Club, Inc., 696 N.E.2d 201, 82 Ohio St.3d 367 (1998)
Wisconsin	Osborn v. Cascade Mountain, Inc., 655 N.W.2d 546, 259 Wis. 2d 481, 2002 Wisc. App. LEXIS 1216, 2003 WI App 1	However the decision in Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Center, 2005 WI 4; 2005 Wisc. LEXIS 2 may void all releases in the state
Maryland	BJ’s Wholesale Club, Inc. v. Rosen, 435 Md. 714; 80 A.3d 345; 2013 Md. LEXIS 897	Maryland top court allows a parent to sign away a minor’s right to sue. Release was not fantastic, but good enough.
	On the Edge, but not enough to really rely on
North Carolina	Kelly v. United States of America, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89741 Kelly , v. United States of America, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135289	Ruling is by the Federal District Court and only a preliminary motion And final decision dismissing the case

What do you think? Leave a comment.

Twitter: RecreationLaw

Facebook: Rec.Law.Now

Facebook Page: Outdoor Recreation & Adventure Travel Law

Blog: www.recreation-law.com

Mobile Site: http://m.recreation-law.com

#AdventureTourism, #AdventureTravelLaw, #AdventureTravelLawyer, #AttorneyatLaw, #Backpacking, #BicyclingLaw, #Camps, #ChallengeCourse, #ChallengeCourseLaw, #ChallengeCourseLawyer, #CyclingLaw, #FitnessLaw, #FitnessLawyer, #Hiking, #HumanPowered, #HumanPoweredRecreation, #IceClimbing, #JamesHMoss, #JimMoss, #Law, #Mountaineering, #Negligence, #OutdoorLaw, #OutdoorRecreationLaw, #OutsideLaw, #OutsideLawyer, #RecLaw, #Rec-Law, #RecLawBlog, #Rec-LawBlog, #RecLawyer, #RecreationalLawyer, #RecreationLaw, #RecreationLawBlog, #RecreationLawcom, #Recreation-Lawcom, #Recreation-Law.com, #RiskManagement, #RockClimbing, #RockClimbingLawyer, #RopesCourse, #RopesCourseLawyer, #SkiAreas, #Skiing, #SkiLaw, #Snowboarding, #SummerCamp, #Tourism, #TravelLaw, #YouthCamps, #ZipLineLawyer, minor, release, Parent Signature, NC, North Carolina, Alaska, AK, AZ, Arizona, CO, Colorado, Florida, FL, CA, California, MA, Massachusetts, Minnesota, MN, ND, North Dakota, OH, Ohio, WI, Wisconsin, Hohe, San Diego, San Diego Unified School District, Global Travel Marketing, Shea, Gonzalez, City Of Coral Gables, Sharon, City of Newton, Moore, Minnesota Baseball Instructional School, McPhail, Bismark Park District, Zivich, Mentor Soccer Club, Osborn, Cascade Mountain, Atkins, Swimwest Family Fitness Center, Minor, Minors, Right to Sue, Utah, UT, Equine, Equine Safety Act,

Sad, Arizona school insurance no longer covering ropes courses.

Posted: May 14, 2014 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Arizona, Challenge or Ropes Course | Tags: Arizona, Arizona Public Schools, challenge course, Payson Unified School District, PUSD, Ropes course | Leave a comment

Ropes courses are being torn down across the state because they can’t be insured

You can say bad attorneys, lousy program, bad instructors, freak accident. But the ropes course or challenge course industry is heading into the history books in Arizona. A lawsuit in Arizona against a public school will force all ropes courses in Arizona Public Schools to be removed.

Because of an accident in Tucson that forced the Arizona schools’ insurance company to pay out millions in a settlement, all ropes courses in Arizona must be removed from school property. Payson installed the ropes course with a federal grant.

In the past ten years I’ve found the following payouts due to ropes courses.

2008	$400,000	Sutter County California School District	Improperly tied into the course
2009	$4,700000	Alpine Towers International	Improper equipment and failure to train

$5.1 million in what we know about. Who knows how much has not been made public or settled.

And what really sucks about all this is ropes courses are not dangerous.

SeeRopes Course To Come Down

For more info on Ropes Courses & Litigation see:

Payouts in Outdoor Recreation http://rec-law.us/121q2k2

Architects, Engineers and Recreation, we need the first two, to be successful in the second http://rec-law.us/1gOSNeT

Assumption of the risk is used to defeat a claim for injuries on a ropes course http://rec-law.us/SDZlBt

Based on the article yes there was going to be a lawsuit http://rec-law.us/16JD0p3

Plaintiff raised argument in work/team building situation that they were forced to sign release http://rec-law.us/XiKRug

Plaintiff uses standards of ACCT to cost defendant $4.7 million http://rec-law.us/11UdbEn

The standard of care for a ropes or challenge course changes based on who is running it and who is using it (30) http://rec-law.us/L2tupe

$400,000 challenge course settlement for shattered ankle http://rec-law.us/1lk77Q7

When did journalism turn from telling a good factual story to trying to place blame for an accident? http://rec-law.us/1cNrxMv

What do you think? Leave a comment.

If you like this let your friends know or post it on FB, Twitter or LinkedIn

Email: Rec-law@recreation-law.com

Google+: +Recreation

Twitter: RecreationLaw

Facebook: Rec.Law.Now

Facebook Page: Outdoor Recreation & Adventure Travel Law

Blog:www.recreation-law.com

Mobile Site: http://m.recreation-law.com

By Recreation Law Rec-law@recreation-law.com James H. Moss #Authorrank

<rel=”author” link=” https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/112453188060350225356/” />

WordPress Tags: Arizona,insurance,Ropes,attorneys,instructors,freak,accident,industry,history,lawsuit,Public,Schools,Tucson,millions,settlement,Payson,payouts,Sutter,School,District,Alpine,Towers,International,Improper,equipment,failure,million,Course,Come,Down,info,Courses,Litigation,Outdoor,Recreation,Architects,Engineers,Assumption,injuries,SDZlBt,article,Plaintiff,argument,team,situation,XiKRug,ACCT,cost,defendant,journalism,Leave,Twitter,LinkedIn,Edit,Email,Google,RecreationLaw,Facebook,Page,Adventure,Travel,Blog,Mobile,Site,James,Moss,Authorrank,author,AdventureTourism,AdventureTravelLaw,AdventureTravelLawyer,AttorneyatLaw,BicyclingLaw,Camps,ChallengeCourse,ChallengeCourseLaw,ChallengeCourseLawyer,CyclingLaw,FitnessLaw,FitnessLawyer,HumanPoweredRecreation,JamesHMoss,JimMoss,Negligence,OutdoorLaw,OutdoorRecreationLaw,OutsideLaw,OutsideLawyer,RecLaw,RecLawBlog,LawBlog,RecLawyer,RecreationalLawyer,RecreationLawBlog,RecreationLawcom,Lawcom,RiskManagement,RockClimbingLawyer,RopesCourse,RopesCourseLawyer,SkiAreas,SkiLaw,SummerCamp,Tourism,TravelLaw,YouthCamps,ZipLineLawyer,Challenge,PUSD

Navajo Nation Council to Vote on Grand Canyon Escalade Project

Posted: April 11, 2014 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Arizona, Grand Canyon, Hopi, Hopi people, Navajo Nation, Navajo Nation Council, z | Leave a comment

Raging Rivers: Navajo Nation Council to Vote on Grand Canyon Escalade Project

Tanya H. Lee

4/4/14

The Navajo Nation‘s proposal to build a multi-million-dollar resort at the confluence of the Little Colorado and Colorado rivers in northern Arizona has raised environmental and cultural concerns. The 420-acre tourist attraction would include a hotel, restaurants, and a gondola tramway from the rim of the Grand Canyon to an elevated river walk on the canyon floor.

Proponents of the project say it will create jobs, monitor and protect sacred sites and generate revenues for rehabilitation of the Bennett Freeze area. Opponents, which include the Hopi Tribe and Grand Canyon Trust, cite the sacred nature of the confluence, the threat to specific sacred sites and the appropriate conditions for religious activities and the fact that this is not an economic development plan that was created by or would necessarily benefit local residents.

Save the Confluence Releases Video on the Grand Canyon Escalade Project

Opposition Continues for the Grand Canyon Escalade

Tony Skrelunas, Grand Canyon Trust Native America program director, says the organization supports economic development and diversification, but the potential mechanized development in the Grand Canyon is not in keeping with its principles of environmental preservation and would set a precedent for the future. “We’re working with the [Navajo] chapters in the area to develop a community-based economic development plan that is culturally and environmentally appropriate,” he says.

The agreement between the Navajo Nation and Confluence Partners LLC, the developers of the project, expired July 1. A new agreement has been signed, but requires approval from the Navajo Tribal Council before it can go into effect. That vote could come at any time.

The Arizona Corporation Commission lists R. Lamar Whitmer, who was instrumental in the development of the Hualapai Tribe’s Grand Canyon Skywalk, as the corporation’s only member. The Grand Canyon Escalade website named other partners in the project as former Navajo Nation President and current Arizona State Sen. Albert Hale; retired Judge Michael C. Nelson, legal counsel to former Navajo Nation President Peterson Zah; Eunice L. Tso, a project management and permitting consultant; Keith A. Lamparter, a design and construction manager; Bernie Propst, former CFO for the Hualapai Tribe’s Grand Canyon Resort Corp.; Michele Crank, a community and government relations consultant; and financial advisor James J. Maguire, Jr.

So far, according to Rick Abasta, communications director for the Navajo Nation’s Office of the President and the Vice President, Confluence Partners has not identified any investors for the project. The Navajo Nation is considering investing several tens of millions of dollars upfront to build the infrastructure for the project. Whitmer has stated that at buildout the project could cost as much as copy billion.

On February 6, Hopi Tribal Chairman Herman G. Honanie wrote to Navajo Nation President Ben Shelly requesting a meeting to discuss the proposed project. The two met on February 10 and discussed, according to Abasta, a right-of-way issue related to a fiber optics cable and the taking of eaglets. The Grand Canyon Escalade proposal was, says Hopi Cultural Preservation Office Director Leigh Kuwanwisiwma, given short shrift, with Shelly telling Honanie that the project was just in the planning stages.

Kuwanwisiwma maintains that the project would violate an intergovernmental compact signed by the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe in 2006. The compact ended a decades-long land dispute between the two tribes. Under its terms, both tribes agreed to end all litigation arising from the dispute, a step that eventually led to the opening the Bennett Freeze area to development. The Bennett Freeze, imposed in 1966 by the federal government, prohibited any new construction or repairs or improvements to existing structures or infrastructure on 1.5-million acres of land in the disputed territory, resulting in grossly substandard and unsafe living conditions for the 8,000 Navajos living there. President Obama signed the legislation that was the final step in lifting the Bennett Freeze in 2009.

The compact gives the Hopi Tribe a permanent, irrevocable permit to enter and use Navajo lands for religious practices (and gives Navajos the same right in regard to religious activities on Hopi lands). It further states that the “landowner tribe shall respect the privacy of persons engaging in religious practices and shall not observe or intrude upon religious activities.”

Kuwanwisiwma says the proposed resort, the tramway and the platforms overlooking the confluence could reveal the location of sacred sites to non-Hopis and would interfere with religious activities. “The most important thing in the compact is that both tribes committed to protect each other’s religious use areas from disturbance.” The proposed project would be built in “a very significant Hopi use area … where the Hopi people still go as part of their pilgrimages,” he says.

The very existence of the development would interfere with Hopi religious observance, says Kuwanwisiwma. “Privacy is so important [for our religious activities]. Tranquility is so important. The solace and relationship with the environment as you’re doing these religious ceremonies requires a lot of emotional well-being to feel good about it. I feel that that is what is going to be taken away if this resort. And quite frankly I think if the resort goes where it’s proposed to be, we will be prevented from getting access, period.”

The Hopi Tribe would like Navajo Nation President Ben Shelly and former President Albert Hale to accept an invitation to come to the reservation and talk to the tribal council and villages about the proposal. But whether they come or not, “it’s clear that the area that they have chosen is just totally not acceptable to the Hopi Tribe,” says Kuwanwisiwma. “We feel that if the Navajo Nation Council supports this project at the confluence, they’re going to violate the provisions of the intergovernmental compact.”

Should the Navajo Nation Tribal Council approve the new agreement and should investors for the project materialize, the proposed Grand Canyon Escalade project has the potential to become yet another cause for conflict on the Colorado Plateau.

States that allow a parent to sign away a minor’s right to sue

Posted: April 10, 2014 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Minors, Youth, Children, Release (pre-injury contract not to sue) | Tags: Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Minor, minors, Right to Sue, Ski Resort, Virginia | Leave a comment

If your state is not listed here, you should assume a parent cannot waive a minor’s right to sue in your state.

State	By Statute	Restrictions
Alaska	Alaska: Sec. 09.65.292	Sec. 05.45.120 does not allow using a release by ski areas for ski injuries
Arizona	ARS § 12-553	Limited to Equine Activities
Colorado	C.R.S. §§13-22-107
Florida	Florida Statute § 744.301 (3)
Virginia	Chapter 62. Equine Activity Liability § 3.2-6202. Liability limited; liability actions prohibited	Allows a parent to sign a release for a minor for equine activities
	By Case Law
California	Hohe v. San Diego Unified Sch. Dist., 224 Cal.App.3d 1559, 274 Cal.Rptr. 647 (1990)
Florida	Global Travel Marketing, Inc v. Shea, 2005 Fla. LEXIS 1454	Allows a release signed by a parent to require arbitration of the minor’s claims
Florida	Gonzalez v. City of Coral Gables, 871 So.2d 1067, 29 Fla. L. Weekly D1147	Release can be used for volunteer activities and by government entities
Massachusetts	Sharon v. City of Newton, 437 Mass. 99; 769 N.E.2d 738; 2002 Mass. LEXIS 384
Minnesota	Moore vs. Minnesota Baseball Instructional School, 2009 Minn. App. Unpub. LEXIS 299
North Dakota	McPhail v. Bismarck Park District, 2003 ND 4; 655 N.W.2d 411; 2003 N.D. LEXIS 3
Ohio	Zivich v. Mentor Soccer Club, Inc., 696 N.E.2d 201, 82 Ohio St.3d 367 (1998)
Wisconsin	Osborn v. Cascade Mountain, Inc., 655 N.W.2d 546, 259 Wis. 2d 481, 2002 Wisc. App. LEXIS 1216, 2003 WI App 1	However the decision in Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Center, 2005 WI 4; 2005 Wisc. LEXIS 2 may void all releases in the state
	On the Edge, but not enough to really rely on
North Carolina	Kelly v. United States of America, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89741	Ruling is by the Federal District Court and only a preliminary motion

What do you think? Leave a comment.

Twitter: RecreationLaw

Facebook: Rec.Law.Now

Facebook Page: Outdoor Recreation & Adventure Travel Law

Blog:www.recreation-law.com

Mobile Site: http://m.recreation-law.com

#AdventureTourism, #AdventureTravelLaw, #AdventureTravelLawyer, #AttorneyatLaw, #Backpacking, #BicyclingLaw, #Camps, #ChallengeCourse, #ChallengeCourseLaw, #ChallengeCourseLawyer, #CyclingLaw, #FitnessLaw, #FitnessLawyer, #Hiking, #HumanPowered, #HumanPoweredRecreation, #IceClimbing, #JamesHMoss, #JimMoss, #Law, #Mountaineering, #Negligence, #OutdoorLaw, #OutdoorRecreationLaw, #OutsideLaw, #OutsideLawyer, #RecLaw, #Rec-Law, #RecLawBlog, #Rec-LawBlog, #RecLawyer, #RecreationalLawyer, #RecreationLaw, #RecreationLawBlog, #RecreationLawcom, #Recreation-Lawcom, #Recreation-Law.com, #RiskManagement, #RockClimbing, #RockClimbingLawyer, #RopesCourse, #RopesCourseLawyer, #SkiAreas, #Skiing, #SkiLaw, #Snowboarding, #SummerCamp, #Tourism, #TravelLaw, #YouthCamps, #ZipLineLawyer, #minor, #release, #ParentSignature, #NC, #NorthCarolina, #Alaska, #AK, #AZ, #Arizona, #CO, #Colorado, #Florida, #FL, #CA, #California, #MA, #Massachusetts, #Minnesota, #MN, #ND, #NorthDakota, #OH, #Ohio, #WI, #Wisconsin, #Hohe, #SanDiego, #SanDiegoUnifiedSchoolDistrict, #GlobalTravelMarketing, #Shea, #Gonzalez, #CityOfCoralGables, #Sharon, #CityofNewton, #Moore, #MinnesotaBaseballInstructionalSchool, #McPhail, #BismarkParkDistrict, #Zivich, #MentorSoccerClub, #Osborn, #CascadeMountain, #Atkins, #SwimwestFamilyFitnessCenter, Minor, Minors, Right to Sue,

WordPress Tags: States,State,Statute,Restrictions,Alaska,areas,injuries,Arizona,Equine,Activities,Colorado,Florida,Virginia,Chapter,Allows,Case,California,Hohe,Diego,Dist,Rptr,Global,Travel,Shea,LEXIS,arbitration,Gonzalez,Coral,Gables,Release,government,entities,Massachusetts,Sharon,Newton,Mass,Minnesota,Baseball,Instructional,School,Minn,Unpub,North,Dakota,McPhail,Bismarck,Park,District,Ohio,Zivich,Mentor,Soccer,Club,Wisconsin,Osborn,Cascade,Mountain,Wisc,decision,Atkins,Swimwest,Center,Edge,Carolina,America,Federal,Court,Leave,Recreation,Edit,Gmail,Twitter,RecreationLaw,Facebook,Page,Outdoor,Adventure,Blog,Mobile,Site,AdventureTourism,AdventureTravelLaw,AdventureTravelLawyer,AttorneyatLaw,BicyclingLaw,Camps,ChallengeCourse,ChallengeCourseLaw,ChallengeCourseLawyer,CyclingLaw,FitnessLaw,FitnessLawyer,HumanPoweredRecreation,JamesHMoss,JimMoss,Negligence,OutdoorLaw,OutdoorRecreationLaw,OutsideLaw,OutsideLawyer,RecLaw,RecLawBlog,LawBlog,RecLawyer,RecreationalLawyer,RecreationLawBlog,RecreationLawcom,Lawcom,RiskManagement,RockClimbingLawyer,RopesCourse,RopesCourseLawyer,SkiAreas,SkiLaw,SummerCamp,Tourism,TravelLaw,YouthCamps,ZipLineLawyer,ParentSignature,NorthCarolina,NorthDakota,SanDiego,SanDiegoUnifiedSchoolDistrict,CityOfCoralGables,CityofNewton,MinnesotaBaseballInstructionalSchool,BismarkParkDistrict,MentorSoccerClub,CascadeMountain,SwimwestFamilyFitnessCenter,Minor,Minors

States that allow a parent to sign away a minor’s right to sue

Posted: March 26, 2014 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Minors, Youth, Children, Release (pre-injury contract not to sue) | Tags: Alaska, Arizona, Camp, Colorado, Exculpatory Agreement, Minor, parent, Recreation, Release, Waiver | Leave a comment

If your state is not listed here, you should assume a parent cannot waive a minor’s right to sue in your state.

State	By Statute	Restrictions
Alaska	Alaska: Sec. 09.65.292	Sec. 05.45.120 does not allow using a release by ski areas for ski injuries
Arizona	ARS § 12-553	Limited to Equine Activities
Colorado	C.R.S. §§13-22-107	Release stops suit for falling off horse at Colorado summer Camp
Florida	Florida Statute § 744.301 (3)	New Florida law allows a parent to sign away a child’s right to sue for injuries
	By Case Law
California	Hohe v. San Diego Unified Sch. Dist., 224 Cal.App.3d 1559, 274 Cal.Rptr. 647 (1990)
Delaware	Hong v. Hockessin Athletic Club, 2012 Del. Super. LEXIS 340	Delaware decision upholds a release signed by a parent against a minor’s claims Delaware holds that mothers signature on contract forces change of venue for minors claims.
Florida	Global Travel Marketing, Inc v. Shea, 2005 Fla. LEXIS 1454	Allows a release signed by a parent to require arbitration of the minor’s claims
Florida	Gonzalez v. City of Coral Gables, 871 So.2d 1067, 29 Fla. L. Weekly D1147	Release can be used for volunteer activities and by government entities
Maryland	BJ’s Wholesale Club, Inc. v. Rosen, 435 Md. 714; 80 A.3d 345; 2013 Md. LEXIS 897	Release upheld for injury to 5 year old in chair care area of store while parents shopped.
Massachusetts	Sharon v. City of Newton, 437 Mass. 99; 769 N.E.2d 738; 2002 Mass. LEXIS 384
Minnesota	Moore vs. Minnesota Baseball Instructional School, 2009 Minn. App. Unpub. LEXIS 299	Minnesota decision upholds parent’s right to sign away a minor’s right to sue.
North Dakota	McPhail v. Bismarck Park District, 2003 ND 4; 655 N.W.2d 411; 2003 N.D. LEXIS 3	North Dakota decision allows a parent to sign away a minor’s right to sue
Ohio	Zivich v. Mentor Soccer Club, Inc., 696 N.E.2d 201, 82 Ohio St.3d 367 (1998)	Ohio Appellate decision upholds the use of a release for a minor for a commercial activity
Wisconsin	Osborn v. Cascade Mountain, Inc., 655 N.W.2d 546, 259 Wis. 2d 481, 2002 Wisc. App. LEXIS 1216, 2003 WI App 1	However the decision in Atkins v. Swimwest Family Fitness Center, 2005 WI 4; 2005 Wisc. LEXIS 2 voided all releases in the state
	On the Edge, but not enough to really rely on
North Carolina	Kelly v. United States of America, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89741	Ruling is by the Federal District Court and only a preliminary motion North Carolina may allow a parent to sign away a minor’s right to sue for injuries when the minor is engaged in non-profit activities sponsored by schools, volunteers, or community organizations

What do you think? Leave a comment.

If you like this let your friends know or post it on FB, Twitter or LinkedIn

Email: Rec-law@recreation-law.com

Google+: +Recreation

Twitter: RecreationLaw

Facebook: Rec.Law.Now

Facebook Page: Outdoor Recreation & Adventure Travel Law

Blog:www.recreation-law.com

Mobile Site: http://m.recreation-law.com

By Recreation Law Rec-law@recreation-law.com James H. Moss #Authorrank

<rel=”author” link=” https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/112453188060350225356/” />

#RecreationLaw, #@RecreationLaw, #Cycling.Law #Fitness.Law, #Ski.Law, #Outside.Law, #Recreation.Law, #Recreation-Law.com, #Outdoor Law, #Recreation Law, #Outdoor Recreation Law, #Adventure Travel Law, #law, #Travel Law, #Jim Moss, #James H. Moss, #Attorney at Law, #Tourism, #Adventure Tourism, #Rec-Law, #Rec-Law Blog, #Recreation Law, #Recreation Law Blog, #Risk Management, #Human Powered, #Human Powered Recreation,# Cycling Law, #Bicycling Law, #Fitness Law, #Recreation-Law.com, #Backpacking, #Hiking, #Mountaineering, #Ice Climbing, #Rock Climbing, #Ropes Course, #Challenge Course, #Summer Camp, #Camps, #Youth Camps, #Skiing, #Ski Areas, #Negligence, #Snowboarding, #RecreationLaw, #@RecreationLaw, #Cycling.Law #Fitness.Law, #SkiLaw, #Outside.Law, #Recreation.Law, #RecreationLaw.com, #OutdoorLaw, #RecreationLaw, #OutdoorRecreationLaw, #AdventureTravelLaw, #Law, #TravelLaw, #JimMoss, #JamesHMoss, #AttorneyatLaw, #Tourism, #AdventureTourism, #RecLaw, #RecLawBlog, #RecreationLawBlog, #RiskManagement, #HumanPowered, #HumanPoweredRecreation,# CyclingLaw, #BicyclingLaw, #FitnessLaw, #RecreationLaw.com, #Backpacking, #Hiking, #Mountaineering, #IceClimbing, #RockClimbing, #RopesCourse, #ChallengeCourse, #SummerCamp, #Camps, #YouthCamps, #Skiing, #Ski Areas, #Negligence, #Snowboarding, #minor, #release, #ParentSignature, #NC, #NorthCarolina,#Alaska, #AK, #AZ, #Arizona, #CO, #Colorado, #Florida, #FL, #CA, #California, #MA, #Massachusetts, #Minnesota, #MN, #ND, #NorthDakota, #OH, #Ohio, #WI, #Wisconsin, #Hohe, #SanDiego, #SanDiegoUnifiedSchoolDistrict, #GlobalTravelMarketing, #Shea, #Gonzalez, #CityOfCoralGables, #Sharon, #CityofNewton, #Moore, #MinnesotaBaseballInstructionalSchool, #McPhail, #BismarkParkDistrict, #Zivich, #MentorSoccerClub, #Osborn, #CascadeMountain, #Atkins, #SwimwestFamilyFitnessCenter, Delware, Maryland, Retail Store, Child Care,

WordPress Tags: States,State,Statute,Restrictions,Alaska,areas,injuries,Arizona,Equine,Activities,Colorado,Release,horse,Camp,Florida,Case,California,Hohe,Diego,Dist,Rptr,Delaware,Hong,Hockessin,Athletic,Club,Super,LEXIS,decision,signature,venue,minors,Global,Travel,Shea,Allows,arbitration,Gonzalez,Coral,Gables,government,entities,Maryland,Wholesale,Rosen,injury,area,parents,Massachusetts,Sharon,Newton,Mass,Minnesota,Baseball,Instructional,School,Minn,Unpub,North,Dakota,McPhail,Bismarck,Park,District,Ohio,Zivich,Mentor,Soccer,Appellate,Wisconsin,Osborn,Cascade,Mountain,Wisc,Atkins,Swimwest,Center,Edge,Carolina,America,Federal,Court,Leave,Twitter,LinkedIn,Recreation,Edit,Email,Google,RecreationLaw,Facebook,Page,Outdoor,Adventure,Blog,Mobile,Site,James,Moss,Authorrank,author,Keywords,Outside,Attorney,Tourism,Risk,Management,Human,Rock,Ropes,Course,Challenge,Summer,Camps,Youth,Negligence,SkiLaw,OutdoorLaw,OutdoorRecreationLaw,AdventureTravelLaw,TravelLaw,JimMoss,JamesHMoss,AttorneyatLaw,AdventureTourism,RecLaw,RecLawBlog,RecreationLawBlog,RiskManagement,HumanPoweredRecreation,CyclingLaw,BicyclingLaw,FitnessLaw,RopesCourse,ChallengeCourse,SummerCamp,YouthCamps,ParentSignature,NorthCarolina,NorthDakota,SanDiego,SanDiegoUnifiedSchoolDistrict,CityOfCoralGables,CityofNewton,MinnesotaBaseballInstructionalSchool,BismarkParkDistrict,MentorSoccerClub,CascadeMountain,SwimwestFamilyFitnessCenter,Delware,Retail,Child,Care

Increase in diving (neck) injuries in Colorado River, Grand Canyon NP.

Posted: August 23, 2013 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Arizona, Colorado River, Grand Canyon, Grand Canyon National Park, National Park Service, Travel and Tourism, United States Bureau of Reclamation, x, y, z | Leave a comment

In the last few weeks the NPS has responded to three shallow water diving incidents into the Colorado River. One of these (not involved with a river trip) resulted in devastating injuries. I’m hoping you might be able inform river guides of this disturbing trend by included a note in the boatman’s s quarterly or your guide email network.

In two of these incidents the patients were diving into the river from the shoreline impacting their heads into the bottom or unseen obstacles In the other incident a patient dove off the rear of a raft that was beached. While we continue to see extremity injury patterns from getting on and off the boats and during side hikes, these incidents usually don’t carry the potential for instantly catastrophic injury like shallow water diving does. Thanks for spreading the word for this watchout situation.

Brandon Torres

Branch Chief of Emergency Services

Grand Canyon National Park

office 928-638-7792928-638-7792

cell 928-607-6014928-607-6014

Grand Canyon Celebration of Art

Posted: August 15, 2013 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Arizona, Art, Grand Canyon | Leave a comment

P.O. Box 399

Grand Canyon, AZ 86023

www.grandcanyon.org

928-863-3878

mrobbins

Miriam Robbins

August 7, 2013

Grand Canyon Association Presents:

A Grand Canyon Celebration of Art

Grand Canyon National Park

September 14, 2013 – January 20, 2014

The Grand Canyon Association and Arizona Public Service are pleased to announce the 5th Annual Grand Canyon Celebration of Art at Grand Canyon National Park. This event features twenty-six artists from around the country who have created a studio piece for

the exhibition and will paint plein air during the week before the exhibit opens.

Visitors will have the opportunity to watch the artists paint as they seek to represent the shifting light and shadow, amazing land forms, and vibrant colors of this vast landscape. Artists will be at the North and South Rims and, for the again this year at Phantom Ranch and Indian Garden September 14-20.

Long before there was color photography, artists like Thomas Moran and Gunnar Widforss contributed to capturing the beauty and mystery of Grand Canyon through art. It was their paintings that helped communicate to the world the need for preservation of such a special place. In 2009, the Grand Canyon Association rejuvenated this idea and brought artists to the South Rim for a week of painting and appreciation of art in the canyon. Today, Celebration of Art exposes tens of thousands of people to live artist renderings at Grand Canyon. It has become the model for outdoor art events in National Parks.

Event Schedule

Plein Air at Grand Canyon
September 14 – 20, 2013
North and South Rim, Grand Canyon National Park

Quick Draw and Auction
Friday, September 20, 2013
9:00 am – noon

Grand Opening Reception and Sale

Saturday, September 21, 2013
11 a.m.-1 p.m.

Kolb Studio

Exhibit and Sale
September 21, 2013 – January 20, 2014
Kolb Studio

Exhibition & Sale at Kolb Studio from September 21, 2013 – January 20, 2013

Please visit our website for information and updates at http://www.grandcanyon.org/celebration.asp.

Proceeds from this event will support the goal of funding an art venue at the South Rim of the Grand Canyon. This permanent home will ensure that future generations of park visitors will be able to view the stunning art collection in the Grand Canyon National Park Museum and Grand Canyon Association Collections.

Kolb Studio is located along the Rim Trail in Grand Canyon Village, 200 yards west of Bright Angel Lodge. For more information about Grand Canyon Association and its programs, go to www.grandcanyon.org.

Founded in 1932, the Grand Canyon Association (GCA) is the National Park Service’s official nonprofit partner raising private funds to benefit Grand Canyon National Park, operating retail shops and visitor centers within the park, and providing premier educational opportunities about the natural and cultural history of the region. GCA works to help preserve and protect Grand Canyon National Park by cultivating support, education and understanding of the park www.grandcanyon.org

2013 Grand Canyon Celebration of Art – press release.docx

Want to work as a Swamper on a Grand Canyon Trip?

Posted: July 23, 2013 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Arizona, Colorado, Colorado River, Grand Canyon, Grand Canyon National Park, OARS, Swamper, Whitewater Rafting | Leave a comment

Win a Grand Canyon Rafting Trip
Wimps Need Not Apply. Here’s Why… This won’t be a vacation. Wait, we haven’t lost you already have we? Because this is your chance to have an epic adventure—two weeks, 280 miles, and some of the biggest whitewater on the planet—as a member of our crew.

That’s right, we’re giving away a backstage pass to the Grand Canyon. We’re going to select one lucky winner to become a “swamper” with O.A.R.S. in the Grand Canyon. Can you say…living the dream?

This is the real deal. You’ll help load the boats, spend some time on the oars, and if you’re lucky, we’ll even let you put the toilet away (just kidding – or are we?). Either way, as a bonafide crew member (don’t worry, “swamper” is just a technical term), you’ll be able to step behind the wheel and experience the Colorado River first-hand.

Sure, you might sweat a little bit and your hands will get dirty, but we can guarantee this trip will be a life-changing experience. Just check out this video if you don’t believe us.

So, if you’re ready to run legendary rapids, explore hidden side canyons, and get lost in the earth’s most famous crack for two of the best weeks of your life, we might have just the job for you…

Head over to our Facebook page from July 15 to August 19, 2013 to sign up for a chance to win this once-in-a-lifetime Grand Canyon experience:

And when you sign up to win our Grand Canyon trip, you’re automatically entered to win daily and weekly prizes like a copy of Kevin Fedarko’s new book, “The Emerald Mile: The Epic Story of the Fastest Ride in History through the Grand Canyon,” or a pair of Teva Original sandals. Bonus!

O.A.R.S. Grand Canyon, Inc. is an authorized concessioner of Grand Canyon National Park

The O.A.R.S. Family of Companies PO Box 67 Angels Camp, CA 95222 Toll Free in North America: 1-800-346-6277 Outside the U.S.A. and Canada: 1-209-736-4677

Arizona Ski Safety Statutes

Posted: July 22, 2013 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Arizona, Ski Area, Skiing / Snow Boarding | Tags: Arizona, Outdoors, Recreation, Resorts, ski area, Skier, Skier Safety Act, skiing, Snowboarder | Leave a comment

Arizona Ski Safety Statutes

ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES

TITLE 5. Amusements and Sports

Chapter 7. Skiing

Article 1. General Provisions

Go to the Arizona Code Archive Directory

A.R.S. § 5-701 (2012)

§ 5-701. Definitions

In this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires:

1. “Base area lift” means a passenger tramway that skiers ordinarily use without first using another passenger tramway.

2. “Chair lift” means a type of transportation on which passengers are carried on chairs suspended in the air and attached to a moving cable, chain or link belt supported by trestles or towers with one or more spans.

3. “Competitor” means a skier actually engaged in competition or in practice for competition with the permission of a ski area operator on any slope or trail or portion of any slope or trail designated for competition by the ski area operator.

4. “Conditions of ordinary visibility” means daylight and, if applicable, nighttime in nonprecipitating weather.

5. “Inherent dangers and risks of skiing” means those dangers or conditions that are an integral part of the sport of skiing, excluding acts of ordinary or gross negligence, or reckless or intentional conduct on the part of the ski area operator. Inherent dangers and risks of skiing include:

(a) Changing weather conditions.

(b) Existing and changing snow surface conditions, such as ice, hard pack, powder, packed powder, wind pack, corn, crust, slush, cut-up and machine-made snow.

(c) Surface or subsurface conditions, whether marked or unmarked, such as bare spots, forest growth, rocks, stumps, streambeds, trees or other natural objects.

(d) Impacts with lift towers, signs, posts, fences or other enclosures, hydrants, water pipes or other man-made structures and their components, whether marked or unmarked.

(e) Variations in steepness or terrain, including roads, catwalks and other terrain modifications, whether natural or as a result of slope design, snowmaking or grooming operations.

(f) Collisions with other skiers.

(g) The failure of skiers to ski within their own abilities.

6. “Passenger tramway” means a device used to transport passengers uphill on skis or in cars on tracks or suspended in the air by the use of steel cables, chains, belts or ropes, usually supported by trestles or towers with one or more spans.

7. “Rope tow” means a mode of transportation that pulls a skier riding on skis as the skier grasps the rope with the skier’s hands.

8. “Ski area” means all ski slopes and trails or other places within the boundary of a ski area operator’s property, administered as a single enterprise in this state.

9. “Ski area operator” means any corporation, company, partnership, firm, association or other commercial entity, including a natural person, and its employees, agents, members, successors in interest, affiliates and assigns that have responsibility for the operations of a ski area.

10. “Ski Slopes and Trails” means those areas designated by a ski area operator for use by skiers for any of the purposes listed in paragraph 11.

11. “Skier” means a person using a ski area for the purpose of skiing or sliding downhill on snow or ice on skis, a toboggan, sled, tube, skibob or snowboard or any other device, using any of the facilities of a ski area, including ski slopes and trails, or observing any activities in a ski area as a sightseer or visitor.

12. “Surface lift” means a mode of transportation that pulls skiers riding on skis by means of attachment to an overhead cable supported by trestles or towers. Surface lift includes a J-bar, a T-bar, a platter pull and any similar device.

History: Last year in which legislation affected this section: 1997

§ 5-702. Posting passenger information signs

A. A ski area operator shall maintain a sign system with concise, simple and pertinent information for the protection and instruction of people on a passenger tramway.

B. A ski area operator shall prominently display signs that are readable in conditions of ordinary visibility and, if applicable, that are adequately lighted for nighttime passengers, as follows:

1. At or near the loading point of each passenger tramway, rope tow and surface lift advising that any person not familiar with the operation of the tramway, rope tow or surface lift should ask ski area personnel for assistance and instruction.

2. In a conspicuous place at the loading area of each two-car or multicar passenger tramway that states the maximum capacity in pounds of the car and the maximum number of persons allowed in the car.

3. In the interior of each car in a two-car or multicar passenger tramway that states the maximum capacity in pounds of the car and the maximum number of persons allowed in the car and that gives instructions for procedures in the case of emergencies.

4. At all chair lifts stating the following:

(a) “Check for loose clothing and equipment”, which shall be posted ahead of the “prepare to unload” sign described in subdivision (c) of this paragraph.

(b) “Keep ski tips up” or “keep tips up”, which shall be posted ahead of any point where skis may come in contact with a platform or the snow surface while a skier is seated in the chair lift.

(d) “Remove pole straps from wrists”, which shall be posted where applicable.

(e) “Stop gate”, which shall be posted where applicable.

(f) “Unload here”, which shall be posted at the point designated for unloading.

5. At all rope tows and surface lifts stating the following:

(a) “Check for loose clothing and equipment”, which shall be posted ahead of the “prepare to unload” sign described in subdivision (b) of this paragraph.

(b) “Prepare to unload”, which shall be posted at least fifty feet ahead of each unloading area.

(d) “Safety gate”, “stay in tracks” or “stop gate”, which shall be posted where applicable.

(e) “Unload here”, which shall be posted at the point designated for unloading or where applicable.

C. At the operator’s discretion a ski area operator may post additional signs not required by subsection B.

D. Before opening a passenger tramway to the public each day, a ski area operator shall inspect the tramway for the presence of the signs required by subsection B or that are posted pursuant to subsection C.

E. The extent of the responsibility of a ski area operator under this section is to post and maintain the signs required by subsection B and to maintain any signs posted pursuant to subsection C. It is a rebuttable presumption that all passengers and skiers saw and understood the signs if evidence exists that the signs required by subsection B or that are posted pursuant to subsection C were posted and the signs were maintained.

History: Last year in which legislation affected this section: 1997

§ 5-703. Posting ski information signs

A. A ski area operator shall maintain a sign and marking system with concise, simple and pertinent information for the protection and instruction of skiers. The signs required by this section shall be readable in conditions of ordinary visibility and, if applicable, that are adequately lighted for nighttime skiers.

B. A ski area operator shall place a sign that depicts and explains signs and symbols that skiers may encounter in the ski area in a position where all skiers who are proceeding to the uphill loading point of each base area lift will see the sign. The sign shall depict and explain at least the following signs and symbols:

1. A green circle and the word “easier”, which designates the least difficult ski slopes and trails of the ski area.

2. A blue square and the words “more difficult”, which designates the ski slopes and trails of the ski area that have a degree of difficulty between the least difficult and most difficult slopes and trails.

3. A black diamond and the words “most difficult”, which designates the most difficult ski slopes and trails of the ski area.

4. A figure in the shape of a skier with a band running diagonally from corner to corner of the sign with the word “closed” printed beneath the emblem.

C. If applicable, a ski area operator shall place a sign at or near the loading point of a passenger tramway that states one of the following:

1. If the tramway transports passengers only to the more difficult or most difficult ski slopes and trails in the ski area, the sign shall state: “WARNING: This lift services ‘more difficult’ (blue square emblem) and ‘most difficult’ (black diamond emblem) slopes and trails only.”.

2. If the tramway transports passengers only to the most difficult ski slopes and trails in the ski area, the sign shall state: “WARNING: This lift services ‘most difficult’ (black diamond emblem) slopes and trails only.”.

D. If a ski area operator closes a ski slope or trail or a portion of a ski slope or trail to the public, the operator shall place a sign notifying skiers that the slope or trail or portion of the slope or trail is closed at each identified entrance to the slope or trail or closed portion of the slope or trail. In lieu of placing a sign at each identified entrance, the ski area operator may close off the entrance with rope or fences.

E. A ski area operator shall place a sign at or near the beginning of each ski slope or trail that contains the appropriate symbol of the relative degree of difficulty of that slope or trail as set forth in subsection B. The requirements of this subsection do not apply to a ski slope or trail that is designated “easier” if a skier may substantially view the slope or trail in its entirety before beginning to ski the slope or trail.

F. A ski area operator shall mark the ski area boundaries that are designated on the trail map.

G. A ski area operator shall mark all ski lift tickets and season passes that the operator sells or makes available to skiers with the following in clearly readable print:

WARNING: Under Arizona law, a skier accepts the risk of any injury to person or property resulting from any of the inherent dangers and risks of skiing, including changing weather conditions, existing and changing snow surface conditions, surface or subsurface conditions, whether marked or unmarked, collisions with natural or man-made objects, whether marked or unmarked and the failure of skiers to ski within their own abilities.

H. A ski area operator shall post and maintain signs where ski lift tickets and ski school lessons are sold and in a location that is clearly visible to skiers who are proceeding to the uphill loading point of each base area lift that state the following in clearly readable print:

WARNING—IMPORTANT: Under Arizona law, a skier accepts the risk of any injury to person or property resulting from any of the inherent dangers and risks of skiing. Some of these risks are listed on your lift ticket or season pass. Please review your ticket or pass and ask the ski area personnel for more information.

History: Last year in which legislation affected this section: 1997

§ 5-704. Additional duties of ski area operators

A. If maintenance equipment is being used to maintain or groom any ski slope or trail that a ski area operator has not designated as closed pursuant to section 5-703, subsection D, the ski area operator shall place a conspicuous notice at or near the beginning of the slope or trail and at any entrance points to the slope or trail that notifies skiers about the presence of the equipment.

B. All snowmobiles operated on the ski slopes or trails of a ski area shall be equipped with at least the following:

1. One lighted head lamp.

2. One lighted red tail lamp.

3. A red or orange flag that is at least forty square inches in size and that is mounted at least five feet above the bottom of the tracks.

C. A ski area operator has no duties to any skier who skis beyond the designated boundaries of the ski area.

History: Last year in which legislation affected this section: 1997

§ 5-705. Duties of skiers in any action against the ski area operator

In any civil action brought by a skier against a ski area operator, the duties of a skier shall be as follows:

1. At all times a skier has the sole responsibility to know the range of the skier’s own ability to negotiate a ski slope or trail and to ski within the limits of that ability. A skier expressly accepts the total risk of and all legal responsibility for injury to person or property resulting from any of the inherent dangers and risks of skiing.

2. Before using a chair lift, passenger tramway, rope tow or surface lift, a skier shall have the knowledge and ability to safely load, ride and unload from the device.

3. A skier shall maintain control of the skier’s speed and course at all times when skiing and shall maintain a proper lookout to enable the skier to avoid collisions with other skiers and with natural and man-made objects, whether marked or unmarked.

4. A skier shall avoid snow maintenance and grooming equipment, vehicles, lift towers, signs and other equipment located on ski slopes and trails.

5. A skier shall heed all posted information, signs and other warnings and shall refrain from acting in a manner that may cause or contribute to the injury of the skier or other persons or property. A skier is presumed to have seen and understood all signs and notices posted pursuant to sections 5-702, 5-703 and 5-704. Under conditions of decreased visibility, the duty rests on the skier to locate and ascertain the meaning of all the signs and notices.

6. A skier shall only use skis, snowboards and other equipment that have been equipped with a functional strap or other device designed to reduce the risk of runaway equipment.

7. A skier shall not ski on a ski slope or trail or a portion of a ski slope or trail that a ski area operator has designated as closed pursuant to section 5-703, subsection D.

8. A skier shall not begin to ski from a stationary position or enter a ski slope or trail from the side unless the skier is able to avoid colliding with moving skiers already on the ski slope or trail.

9. A skier shall not cross the uphill track or place any object in the uphill track of a rope tow or surface lift except at locations that have been designated for crossing by a ski area operator.

10. A skier shall not move uphill on any passenger tramway or use any ski slope or trail while the skier’s ability to do so is impaired by the consumption of alcohol or by the use of any narcotic or other drug.

11. A skier involved in a collision with another skier that results in an injury shall not leave the vicinity of the collision before giving the skier’s name and current address to an employee of the ski area operator or a member of a paid or voluntary ski patrol. This paragraph does not prohibit a skier from leaving the scene of a collision to secure first aid for a person who is injured in the collision. If a skier leaves the scene of a collision to secure first aid, the skier shall leave the skier’s name and current address as required by this paragraph after securing the first aid.

12. A skier shall not knowingly enter the public or private lands of an adjoining ski area if the owner of that land has closed that land to skiers and the landowner or the ski area operator has designated the adjoining land as closed.

History: Last year in which legislation affected this section: 1997

§ 5-706. Release of liability

In any action brought by a skier against a ski area operator, if the ski area operator proves that the skier signed a valid release, the ski area operator’s liability shall be determined by the terms of the release.

History: Last year in which legislation affected this section: 1997

§ 5-707. Competition

A. Before the beginning of any competition, a ski area operator shall allow any competitor a reasonable visual inspection of the course or area where the competition is to be held.

B. A competitor accepts the risk of all course conditions, including weather and snow conditions, course construction or layout and obstacles that a visual inspection immediately before the run could have revealed.

C. In any action brought by a competitor against any ski area operator, if the ski area operator proves that the participant in the competition signed a valid release, the ski area operator’s liability shall be determined by the terms of the release.

HISTORY: Last year in which legislation affected this section: 1997

Grand Canyon Youth needs Program Director

Posted: July 19, 2013 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Arizona, Flagstaff, Flagstaff Arizona, GCY, Grand Canyon, Grand Canyon National Park, Park, Program director, Travel and Tourism, United States | Leave a comment

PROGRAM DIRECTOR JOB DESCRIPTION

Job Title: Program Director, Grand Canyon Youth, Inc.

Location: Flagstaff, Arizona

Salary: $32,000

Benefits: Health, Dental and Retirement

Work Hours: Flexible schedule that varies by season; some nights and weekends; average 40 hour work week

Position Open: July 15-August 15, 2013

To Apply: Please submit a resume, cover letter and references to Executive Director, Emma Wharton

_____________________________________________________________________________________

OVERVIEW

The Program Director for Grand Canyon Youth (GCY) is responsible for the preparation, correspondence and coordination of the programmatic aspects of Grand Canyon Youth’s river education programs. The Program Director must have the ability to develop and maintain professional relationships with GCY staff, youth participants, parents, guides, drivers, volunteers, and community partners.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Program Development (5%)

• Manage program documents

• Develop and implement educational curriculum/goals

• Collect, create and distribute educational resources

Program Preparation (90%)

• Orient the teachers, partnership agencies, and community members who work with Grand Canyon Youth to the goals of Grand Canyon Youth.

• Act as the main point of contact with groups and participants

• Maintain and facilitate on-going communication through email, phone and in-person meetings

• Schedule and lead informational meetings

• Manage the financial aid approval process

• Conduct post-season debriefs and evaluations

Other Responsibilities (5%)

• Adhere and be familiar with the GCY risk management policies, procedures, and protocols.

• Coordination of an on-river educational program

SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE

• Enthusiasm for working with middle and high school age youth

• Excellent verbal and written communication skills

• Superior organization skills and ability to formulate efficient systems

• Ability to document and communicate details

• High interest in experiential education & development of educational resources for outdoor and site-based education

• Creative and effective problem-solving skills

• Strong work ethic

• Strong ability to multi-task and prioritize tasks

• Demonstrated ability to innovate, rather than maintain status quo

• Ability to function well in a busy work environment (including a shared office with multiple interruptions)

• Practical knowledge and experience using a variety of office equipment and programs (including, but not limited to, desktop computer, shared documents, printer, fax machine, multi-line telephone, copier, email, word processing, spreadsheets)

• Flexibility

• Sense of humor

Minimum Qualifications:

• Bachelor’s degree and/or any combination of education, training and experience which demonstrates the ability to perform the duties of the position

• Clean driving record

• Ability to pass a background check

• Minimum age of 21

Preferences:

• At least two years experience working with youth and/or working in nonprofit management

• River experience

• Wilderness First Responder or Wilderness First Aid training

NOTES:

• This position is subject to the availability of grant funds.

• This job description may evolve as the needs of the organization change.

• Grand Canyon Youth, Inc. is an equal opportunity employer.

Grand Canyon Youth, Inc. is a non-profit organization. Our mission is to provide an experiential education for youth along the rivers and canyons of the Southwest in an effort to promote environmental awareness, community involvement, personal growth, and teamwork among people of diverse backgrounds.

Our ideal candidate will be dependable, trustworthy and able to follow up with and complete tasks in a timely manner. The GCY Program Director must be very organized and whole-heartedly embrace the values outlined in our mission.

Emma Wharton

Executive Director

Grand Canyon Youth

ph 928.773.7921

fx 928.774.8941

www.gcyouth.org

Want a job rowing a boat or motor rig in the Grand Canyon?

Posted: June 20, 2013 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Michigan, Triathlon, Youth Camps, Zip Line | Tags: Arizona, Boatman, Grand Canyon, Grand Canyon National Park, National Parks and Monuments, Park, Travel and Tourism, United States | Leave a comment

Hello everyone,

Poster for Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona, USA (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

There are 2 small craft operator (whitewater boat operator) positions now open in Grand Canyon National Park. The positions opened today, June 17th and will be open for applications until July 12th. The positions have a 4 year term. You can access the job posting/descriptions/requirements and apply online at:

https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/345603000

This information came from the Grand Canyon River Guides Association. If you love the Grand Canyon, you should be a member.

Fred Phillips Consulting, LLC has a job on the Lower Colorado

Posted: May 17, 2013 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Arizona | Tags: Arizona, Blythe California, California, Colorado, Colorado River, Lake Mead, Nevada, PRBO Conservation Science | Leave a comment

Seasonal Job Announcement Lower Colorado River and tributaries in Arizona, California and Nevada

The Yellow-billed Cuckoo was named Cuculus americanus in 1758. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Position: Yellow-Billed Cuckoo Field Crew Leaders and Surveyors, Lower Colorado River, Arizona, California, and Nevada

Start Date: May30- August 25

Status: Seasonal

Number of Openings: 2 Crew Leaders and 9 Surveyor Crew

Fred Phillips Consulting (FPC) is potentially looking for 2 field crew leaders and 9 surveyor crew members to conduct Yellow-Billed Cuckoo surveys on the Lower Colorado River from Lake Mead area south to the U.S. Mexican Border pending funding. The teams will be based out of Yuma, AZ, Parker, AZ, and Blythe, CA and work will be conducted at Havasu National Wildlife Reserve, Bill Williams River NWR, Cibola NWR, and Yuma East Wetlands. FPC is teaming with PRBO Conservation Science to conduct 5 years of yellow-billed cuckoo monitoring on the Lower Colorado River. FPC is a small business environmental consulting company based out of Flagstaff, AZ. We have been designing, implementing, managing and monitoring large-scale habitat restoration projects on the Lower Colorado River for over 12 years, including wildlife and bird surveys.

Two crew leaders are needed to conduct surveys from May 30- August 30. Crew leaders will assist with Yellow-billed cuckoo surveys along the lower Colorado River. Duties will include: supervising 1-5 biological technicians, project logistics, data collection and management, and conducting presence/absence surveys.

Nine field surveyors are needed from May 30- August 30. Field surveyor crew duties include conducting presence/absence yellow-billed cuckoo surveys using a playback tape method and data entry.

Qualifications Required:

Crew leaders must have 1) at least one year of field crew leader experience and an additional 2-3 years of avian survey

Colorado River @ Lake Mead National Recreation, Nevada / Arizona (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

experience, 2) know how to navigate using a map and GPS unit, 3) have computer and data management skills, 4) experience with call-back bird survey methods, 5) the ability to carry a heavy backpack in hot and humid conditions, off-trail in remote areas. Crew leaders need to have a valid driver’s license and be certified in First Aid and CPR.

Field surveyors must: 1) have previous avian field work experience, 2) skills using a map and GPS unit in the field, 3) be able to carry a heavy backpack in hot and humid conditions, off-trail in remote areas, 4) have computer skills, and 5) work in pairs or individually in the field.

Housing and work vehicles will be provided. Individuals will be responsible for getting themselves to and from field housing during non-working hours.

Field and Survey Conditions:

The Lower Colorado River is hot and humid during the summer with temperatures ranging from 80-115 F. Field work is initiated in the early morning prior to sunrise, and often times accessing field sites will be conducted in the dark. Work will include conducting surveys in the morning and entering data on the computer the same day. Field staff will work a 5 day on and 2 day off schedule, but must be able to work any days of the week. The schedule may change and field staff must be adaptable to those changes. Some crew, particularly crew leaders, may have to work over 40 hour weeks.

Check out more of the exciting work we are doing at http://www.fredphillipsconsulting.com

Email/Mail Resume and references to:

Yellow billed cuckoo fws (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Heidi Trathnigg

htrathnigg@fredphillipsconsulting.com

401 South Leroux Street

Flagstaff, AZ 86001

928-773-1530 Phone

928-774-4166 Fax

What do you think? Leave a comment.

If you like this let your friends know or post it on FB, Twitter or LinkedIn

Email: Rec-law@recreation-law.com

Google+: +Recreation

Twitter: RecreationLaw

Facebook: Rec.Law.Now

Facebook Page: Outdoor Recreation & Adventure Travel Law

Blog:www.recreation-law.com

Mobile Site: http://m.recreation-law.com

By Recreation Law Rec-law@recreation-law.com James H. Moss #Authorrank

<rel=”author” link=” https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/112453188060350225356/” />

#RecreationLaw, #@RecreationLaw, #Cycling.Law #Fitness.Law, #Ski.Law, #Outside.Law, #Recreation.Law, #Recreation-Law.com, #Outdoor Law, #Recreation Law, #Outdoor Recreation Law, #Adventure Travel Law, #law, #Travel Law, #Jim Moss, #James H. Moss, #Attorney at Law, #Tourism, #Adventure Tourism, #Rec-Law, #Rec-Law Blog, #Recreation Law, #Recreation Law Blog, #Risk Management, #Human Powered, #Human Powered Recreation,# Cycling Law, #Bicycling Law, #Fitness Law, #Recreation-Law.com, #Backpacking, #Hiking, #Mountaineering, #Ice Climbing, #Rock Climbing, #Ropes Course, #Challenge Course, #Summer Camp, #Camps, #Youth Camps, #Skiing, #Ski Areas, #Negligence, #Snowboarding, #RecreationLaw, #@RecreationLaw, #Cycling.Law #Fitness.Law, #SkiLaw, #Outside.Law, #Recreation.Law, #RecreationLaw.com, #OutdoorLaw, #RecreationLaw, #OutdoorRecreationLaw, #AdventureTravelLaw, #Law, #TravelLaw, #JimMoss, #JamesHMoss, #AttorneyatLaw, #Tourism, #AdventureTourism, #RecLaw, #RecLawBlog, #RecreationLawBlog, #RiskManagement, #HumanPowered, #HumanPoweredRecreation,# CyclingLaw, #BicyclingLaw, #FitnessLaw, #RecreationLaw.com, #Backpacking, #Hiking, #Mountaineering, #IceClimbing, #RockClimbing, #RopesCourse, #ChallengeCourse, #SummerCamp, #Camps, #YouthCamps, #Skiing, #Ski Areas, #Negligence, #Snowboarding, sport and recreation laws, ski law, cycling law, Colorado law, law for recreation and sport managers, bicycling and the law, cycling and the law, ski helmet law, skiers code, skiing accidents, Recreation Lawyer, Ski Lawyer, Paddlesports Lawyer, Cycling Lawyer, Recreational Lawyer, Fitness Lawyer, Rec Lawyer, Challenge Course Lawyer, Ropes Course Lawyer, Zip Line Lawyer, Rock Climbing Lawyer, Adventure Travel Lawyer, Outside Lawyer, Recreation Lawyer, Ski Lawyer, Paddlesports Lawyer, Cycling Lawyer, #RecreationalLawyer, #FitnessLawyer, #RecLawyer, #ChallengeCourseLawyer, #RopesCourseLawyer, #ZipLineLawyer, #RockClimbingLawyer, #AdventureTravelLawyer, #OutsideLawyer,

WordPress Tags: Phillips,Seasonal,Announcement,Lower,Colorado,River,tributaries,Arizona,California,Nevada,Position,Cuckoo,Field,Crew,Leaders,Surveyors,Start,Date,August,Status,Number,Openings,Surveyor,Lake,Mead,area,Mexican,Border,teams,Yuma,Parker,Blythe,Havasu,National,Wildlife,Reserve,Bill,Williams,Cibola,East,Wetlands,PRBO,Conservation,Science,Flagstaff,habitat,restoration,bird,Duties,technicians,data,collection,management,presence,absence,Nine,playback,method,Qualifications,leader,unit,computer,skills,backpack,areas,driver,vehicles,Individuals,hours,Survey,Conditions,temperatures,sunrise,Work,Some,hour,Check,Email,Mail,Resume,references,Heidi,Trathnigg,South,Leroux,Street,Leave,Twitter,LinkedIn,Recreation,Edit,Google,RecreationLaw,Facebook,Page,Outdoor,Adventure,Travel,Blog,Mobile,Site,James,Moss,Authorrank,author,Outside,Attorney,Tourism,Risk,Human,Rock,Ropes,Course,Challenge,Summer,Camp,Camps,Youth,Negligence,SkiLaw,OutdoorLaw,OutdoorRecreationLaw,AdventureTravelLaw,TravelLaw,JimMoss,JamesHMoss,AttorneyatLaw,AdventureTourism,RecLaw,RecLawBlog,RecreationLawBlog,RiskManagement,HumanPoweredRecreation,CyclingLaw,BicyclingLaw,FitnessLaw,RopesCourse,ChallengeCourse,SummerCamp,YouthCamps,managers,helmet,accidents,Lawyer,Paddlesports,Recreational,Line,RecreationalLawyer,FitnessLawyer,RecLawyer,ChallengeCourseLawyer,RopesCourseLawyer,ZipLineLawyer,RockClimbingLawyer,AdventureTravelLawyer,OutsideLawyer,avian

Sweet Gig! Northern Arizona Unviersity River Coordinator Position

Posted: March 26, 2013 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Arizona, Northern Arizona University, x, y, z | Leave a comment

Outdoor Recreation River Program Coordinator Northern Arizona University Campus Recreation Services

Northern Arizona University (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

You can always go to nau.jobs and click on Careers@nau and it should be listed under Campus Recreation Services down the list.

You can view and apply for this job at HERE.

English: View of the snow caped San Francisco Peaks from the Northern Arizona University campus close to Aspen Hall.

Arizona Sales Representative

Posted: March 10, 2013 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Arizona | Tags: Arizona, Business, Code of Iowa, Contract, Employment, Independent Contractor, Independent Rep, Manufacture, Rep, Sales, Wage | Leave a comment

ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES

TITLE 44. TRADE AND COMMERCE

CHAPTER 11. REGULATIONS CONCERNING PARTICULAR BUSINESSES

ARTICLE 15. SALES REPRESENTATIVE CONTRACTS

Go to the Arizona Code Archive Directory

A.R.S. § 44-1798.01 (2012)

§ 44-1798.01. Sales representative contract

A. The sales representative and the principal shall enter into a written contract. The contract shall set forth the method by which the sales representative’s commission is to be computed and paid.

B. The principal shall provide each sales representative with a signed copy of the contract. The principal shall obtain a signed receipt for the contract from each sales representative.

§ 44-1798.02. Termination of sales representative contract; payment of earned commissions

A. If an agreement of services is terminated for any reason both of the following apply:

1. All the commissions due through the time of termination shall be paid to the sales representative within a period of not to exceed thirty days after termination.

2. All the commissions that become due after the effective date of termination shall be paid to the sales representative within fourteen days after they become due.

B. The principal shall pay the sales representative all commissions due while the business relationship is in effect in accordance with the agreement between the parties.

C. A principal who fails to comply with subsections A and B of this section is liable to the sales representative for damages in the amount of three times the sum of the unpaid commissions owed to the sales representative.

D. The prevailing party in an action brought under this section is entitled to the cost of the suit, including reasonable attorney fees.

E. Commissions shall be paid at the usual place of payment unless the sales representative requests that the com-missions be sent by registered mail. If, in accordance with a request by the sales representative, the sales representative’s commissions are sent by mail, the commissions are deemed to have been paid as of the date of the registered postmark on the envelope.

F. Unless payment is made pursuant to a binding and final written settlement agreement and release, the acceptance by a sales representative of a commission payment from the principal does not constitute a release as to the balance of any commissions claimed due. A full release of all commission claims that is required by a principal as a condition to a partial commission payment is null and void.

WordPress Tags: Arizona,Sales,Representative,STATUTES,TITLE,TRADE,COMMERCE,CHAPTER,REGULATIONS,PARTICULAR,BUSINESSES,ARTICLE,CONTRACTS,Code,Archive,Directory,method,receipt,HISTORY,Laws,Termination,payment,agreement,relationship,accordance,subsections,action,cost,attorney,Commissions,missions,envelope,settlement,acceptance

The 2013 Whale Foundation Calendar is Spectacular

Posted: October 11, 2012 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Arizona, Colorado River, Flagstaff, Flagstaff Arizona, Grand Canyon | Leave a comment

Support the Whale Foundation supported by Grand Canyon River Guides.

Order yours today!

Calendars are $12/ea and $3/ea shipping.

Order now by sending a check and your address to:

The Whale Foundation

P.O. Box 855

Flagstaff, AZ 86002

If you are thinking about giving them as gifts, that is a fantastic idea! There are discounts for orders over ten, contact the office through our email for details.

Go to our Facebook site to find a list of retailers carrying our calendar.

There are also more photos from the calendar for your viewing pleasure at:

http://www.facebook.com/WhaleFoundation

Email us at:

bigdanhall@gmail.com

Pick one up at our office and save the shipping costs. We are at the same address as the Grand Canyon River Guides office,

515 W. Birch Street, Flagstaff

WordPress Tags: Whale,Foundation,Calendar,Spectacular,Support,Grand,Canyon,River,Guides,Order,Calendars,Flagstaff,office,Facebook,retailers,photos,WhaleFoundation,Email,Pick,Birch,Street

Public Input Received on LTEMP EIS Alternatives………long wait, big fight, stay involved

Posted: October 2, 2012 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Arizona, Colorado, Colorado River, EIS, Flagstaff, Flagstaff Arizona, Grand Canyon, Grand Canyon National Park, LTEMP, National Park Service, NPS | Leave a comment

Public Input Received on LTEMP EIS Alternatives
***********************************************

The Bureau of Reclamation and the National Park Serviceextended an opportunity for members of the public to provide input on LTEMP EIS alternatives after

preliminary alternative concepts were published in a newsletter on March 30, 2012, and the agencies hosted a public workshop on alternatives in Flagstaff, Arizona on April 4 and 5, 2012. Input was received from the Basin States (consisting of the seven Colorado River Basin states and the Upper Colorado River Commission), the Colorado River Energy Distributors Association (CREDA), the Grand Canyon Trust, and the Irrigation and Electrical Districts Association of Arizona (IEDA). This input can be viewed on the LTEMP EIS website at
http://ltempeis.anl.gov/news/index.cfm#PublicInput

The LTEMP joint-lead agencies are reviewing this material and using it to inform development of alternatives to be considered in the LTEMP EIS.

For More Information
********************

To learn more about how you can participate in the EIS process, visit the “Getting Involved” page of the LTEMP EIS Web Site
(http://ltempeis.anl.gov/involve/index.cfm).

If you have questions or need more information, contact the LTEMP EIS Webmaster at ltempeiswebmaster@anl.gov

Please forward this message to any party you feel may be interested in the LTEMP EIS.

_________________CONTACTS/SUBSCRIPTIONS________________

FEEDBACK

Support the Grand Canyon River Guides Boatman Quarterly Review. The finest publication I read

Posted: September 7, 2012 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Arizona, Boatman Quarterly Review, BQR, Colorado, Flagstaff Arizona, GCRGA, Grand Canyon, Grand Canyon National Park, Grand Canyon River Guides Association | Leave a comment

Hey all you BQR lovers out there!

It has come to my attention that the 2012 CIRCLE OF FRIENDS fundraising drive for the BQR is falling short by about $3

,00

0 year-to-date as compared to last year . Considering that we’ve vastly improved the BQR by moving to a FULL COLOR FORMAT, we would expect to be that much more ahead! We’ve received tons of heartwarming emails and notes from those of you who LOVE the new color editions of the BQR. GCRG wants to be able to continue to produce the BQR at this high quality level, so we really need the support of ALL of our members to make this happen. That means YOU!

So if you have not done so already, please consider contributing to the Circle of Friends fundraising drive TODAY! Thanks a million to all of you who have already donated — your support means the world to us.

Don’t worry if you lost your Circle of Friends letter we sent you in early May. You can contribute ANYTIME! Just put “Circle of Friends” in the memo portion of the check. The contribution levels are:

Friend $1 – $99
Sponsor $100 – $499
Protector $500 – $999
Steward $ 1,000 – $2,499
Advocate $2,500 – $4,999
Philanthropist $5000 or more

The BQR Circle of Friends makes you a direct contributor to the outstanding quality of our publication and our ability to

foster stewardship and advocacy for the Colorado River experience you love. Large or small, we appreciate any and all contributions and they make a BIGdifference! Thanks for your support!

Lynn Hamilton
Executive Director
Grand Canyon River Guides, Inc.
PO Box 1934
Flagstaff, AZ 86002
(928) 773-1075 phone
(928) 773-8523 fax
gcrg
www.gcrg.org

BioScience Technician positions at Grand Canyon National Park

Posted: August 17, 2012 | Author: Recreation Law | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Arizona, Employment, Grand Canyon, Grand Canyon National Park, Job, National Park Service, NPS, Resource Management, Travel and Tourism | Leave a comment

Grand Canyon National park is currently searching for up to 30 people to help out with Science and Resource Managementactivities, including lots of fisheries

field work beginning in November. These positions are intermittent, meaning that there is no guarantee of work and no set work schedule. Intermittent employees are eligible to work up to 1039 hours in a calendar year, with extra paid training hours available as necessary. There is no housing, travel money, or insurance available. However, intermittent employees can receive overtime pay. While Grand Canyon is not guaranteeing any work, intermittent employees do not have to be available for every trip. This type of position is excellent for someone with a (flexible) job or someone that has other seasonal work and may be interested in working in the field when trips are available. These positions can be maintained for years to come.

For more information about the position, and for information about how to apply, please click the following link: http://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/322954400

There will be a lot of backcountry field work with the fisheries program this fall and winter, and other programs within Grand Canyon National Park‘s Science and Resource Management Division have project needs as well. We are especially interested in people with general science and backcountry experience. Please distribute this to anyone that think may be interested. Again, the position is open on USA Jobs from August 13-24.

Thank you,
Emily

It's not what I write, It's what you Learn

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

What do you think? Leave a comment.

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

The most changes in this form have occurred in the last year over the last ten years.

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Arizona Voters Overwhelmingly Support Grand Canyon National Monument, New Poll Finds

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Raging Rivers: Navajo Nation Council to Vote on Grand Canyon Escalade Project

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES

§ 5-701. Definitions

§ 5-702. Posting passenger information signs

§ 5-703. Posting ski information signs

§ 5-704. Additional duties of ski area operators

§ 5-705. Duties of skiers in any action against the ski area operator

§ 5-706. Release of liability

§ 5-707. Competition

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Job Title: Program Director, Grand Canyon Youth, Inc.

Location: Flagstaff, Arizona

Salary: $32,000

Benefits: Health, Dental and Retirement

Work Hours: Flexible schedule that varies by season; some nights and weekends; average 40 hour work week

Position Open: July 15-August 15, 2013

To Apply: Please submit a resume, cover letter and references to Executive Director, Emma Wharton

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Hello everyone,

This information came from the Grand Canyon River Guides Association. If you love the Grand Canyon, you should be a member.

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Public Input Received on LTEMP EIS Alternatives
***********************************************

For More Information
********************

Friend $1 – $99
Sponsor $100 – $499
Protector $500 – $999
Steward $ 1,000 – $2,499
Advocate $2,500 – $4,999
Philanthropist $5000 or more