Fall cases

Prior to July 1, 1990, ski area operators were obliged not only to operate their ski areas in compliance with the specific requirements of the Ski Safety Statute (regarding the marking of slopes, the padding and marking of man made objects, and posting of specific warnings) but also to exercise a reasonable duty of care in the design, maintenance and operation of their slopes. The 1989-90 General Assembly passed amendments to the Ski Safety Act. These amendments provided that no skier could recover for injuries resulting from the inherent dangers of skiing; and, limiting damages recoverable from a ski area operator for cases except for lift accidents. In 1995, the Colorado Supreme Court interpreted these amendments in Graven v. Vail Associates, Inc. 909 P. 2d 514 (Colo. 1995) the Colorado Supreme Court adopted a narrow construction of the inherent danger provisions of the Colorado Ski Act. C.R.S. §33-44-101 et seq. This precedent will allow some skiers, who are injured while skiing, to advance a claim for injuries against a ski area operator if the injury results not from a ski area operator's breach of a specific duty set out in the Ski Act, but, rather from a danger or risk which is found to be not "integral" to the sport. Followed: Dovey et al v. Victoria Breckenridge et al., 95 CV 1153, District Court, City and County of Denver, State of Colorado (Order denying Motion to Dismiss, 1/3/96).