Skiier sues Ski Sundown, claiming liability in accident that left him paralyzed

what point are you trying to make?

I'm not concerned with his rights.  His choice to take the case to trial could have a serious impact on the future of terrain parks in this country.  That's the basis for my concern. 
Insurance premiums paid by resorts go up as a result of these lawsuits, meaning that small scale mountains eventually won't be able to afford the liability associated with providing its customers with a park or with all the elements of a park.  Keep that in mind. 

he lost the case...

Respectfully lobbying directly to the source of the problem itself is the best way to accomplish any change and prevent the trend of similar lawsuits indefinitely.

what problem? he lost the case...

c'mon son just let it go. i grew up skiing sundown and they won. everyone should just be happy with the desicion because it could have gona the other way and really hurt the mountain.

yea it sucks this all happened. but finnally the courts ruled correctly in its case involving a ski mountain. im sure if sundown took a hit like snoqualmine they may not be having a season this year

word

http://www.registercitizen.com/articles/2010/10/20/news/doc4cbe6f66c35e8047334266.txt

That happened at Snoqualmie, and that decision had a huge impact on the industry.  Even though it happened in Washington State, most Canadian resorts did not build parks for a period of time while they assessed the impact. 

Urban legend is that park builders, couldn't convince the jury that the jumps were "safe".  Because I was doing research for my business concept, I called and spoke to a guy who was in the court room for that whole trial.  He told me that it actually had nothing to do with jump safety.  Even so, it significantly changes procedures for park builders around the country. 

If the trial isn't already over, I suggest that all of you that ski Sundown should call up Sundown's attorneys and volunteer to testify.  You never know what might be the tipping point.  It is in every NSer's best interest that this case go in favor of Sunlight.  Insurance costs are already going up for businesses.  All it takes is for a few of the big areas to decide that the cost to benefit for terrain parks is too high and they will be history.  Don't believe that can happen?  Skate parks disappeared for almost 20 years for exactly the same reason. 

I never read these statements or any official court documents, but I meant the fact that they needed to state he wasn't accidentally in the park and was aware of what he was doing, if that's whats stated in the documents. If he was trying to make it out as "I was skiing along on a normal slope and suddenly found myself twenty feet in the air and falling towards my doom" than that's stupid.

Well that's all well and fine, but seeing that he isn't actually the source of the problem, only a part of it, i fail to see your point?

yeah stalking him on facebook, then sending a message to him is pretty fuckin rude at best.

If anything happens to that beautiful mountain (hill) I quit skiing

http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail/PublicCaseDetail.aspx?DocketNo=LLICV085003453S

I don't think it has been published yet.

So glad he lost

It's troubling that every frivolous lawsuit that some dumbass who hurts himself brings against legitimate companies who are not at fault winds up in court in front of a jury and costs the company thousands of dollars in legal fees

It sounds like your real complaint is with the exorbitant amount of punitive damages juries are awarding when the actual negligence wasn't very reprehensible or gross.

It is actually a beautiful thing that people in this country have the right to a trial for any matter they feel is unjust.  The reason this is is because of the United States common law tradition where rules are not only made by the legislative body but also by the judicial system. 

What you are all forgetting is that this case, where it was decided that Ski Sundown was not liable even though it didn't have a a fence around the terrain park now sets some sort of precedent for the next time somebody sues a ski resort for not having a fence around the terrain park.  There were likely other issues that the court thought were dispositive, but that is one that I noticed in my brief reading of the closing arguments of the case.  Obviously any future case will likely be slightly different than this one, but the fact that this lawsuit was even brought and made it to a courtroom just helps define the law more clearly surrounding ski resorts and their terrain parks.

It is very sad that this kid got hurt.  It is also sad that the resort had to spend time and money defending itself when it seemed somewhat obvious to most of us that the kid was more at fault than the resort.  It is not sad, however, that he had the opportunity to find out who was really at fault.  Nor is it sad that the area of law concerning ski resort liability has now been defined, and is even more helpful for resorts to know in the future what type of precautions they need to take.

Last item on 10/20 says verdict for defendant.  That sounds like the case went for Sundown.  Is that correct? 

yes.  jury took less than an hour and a half to decide.