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

Again you are not listening to what i am saying, and you seem unable to abandon your legal perspective on my ideas.
What i am saying is that people should behave responsibly and ethically, no matter what the legal system will allow you to do. As i have said in earlier threads this is not the case in the US, and it seems to be closely connected to what i call the culture of lawsuits.
Now the part where you talk about punitve damages being too high and awarded to the winning side (i assume that's what you meant even though you said the opposite) is somewhere where the change im calling for could begin. Award them to charity, or in other cases reduce them to reasonable amounts, and all of a sudden the motivation for ridicolous law suits will be significantly less than before. This might bring about a change in peoples perception of how the legal system works and can be used. And it seems like it is something that is a realistic goal to achieve. There you have it, you clever law boys had the answer all along!
You seem to be somewhat annoyed with me, but i hope you understand that i am only trying to come up with ideas, and discuss a subject that effects us all. I am by no means an expert in American law, and i appreciate to get to know more about it through this discussion, so forgive me if my ideas and questions annoy you, i am only trying to learn, and figure out why these things are happening. I have a completely different perspective on this as i am studying history and sociology, so my take on things are very different from your's, but i like to think that that's a good thing. Together we can change the world! (not really).
 
1. I am listening to what you are saying. This time, however, you changed somewhat what you said. I agree that people should act more responsibly and more ethically.
2. I actually did say that punitive damages are too high (even though you allege that I said the opposite). I specifically said: "the dollar amounts given in pure punitive damages are way too high." You then went on to agree with exactly what I said. Saying that the damages should be given to charities and cause people to not want to bring actions against corporations since they won't be receiving huge dollar amounts in punitive damages.

 
"These punitive damages are usually given to the losing side in a lawsuit"
That's what i meant, am i correct in assuming that this is not true? I never said that you didn't say that punitive damages were too high, in fact, like you said, i agreed with you that they are. As did i in general with regards to the punitive damages issue, which was something that i was not aware of before you enlightened me.
 
Sorry for any confusion. The reason I said that punitive damages are given to the other side is because that is the current practice that I disagree with.
 
A 50 year old ignorant woman approached me and my team earlier this year about a guy in Washington who is paralyzed and her brother is the lawyer on his side or something

The story goes that he was supposedly not in a marked terrain park area and hit an unmarked jump and became a quadropoledic (spelling?) and she began to argue that park shapers have absolutely no clue what they are doing. That the resorts "Hire some random guy with no training" to shape the jumps. and that all these calculations etc go in to the jumps, they dont just bum around on tractors and make random shit.

Of course, we all got heated and argued with her that all this physics and whatnot go in to jump making and that he must have been oblivious to his surroundings but she continued that it was the parks fault.

When I brought up the argument of the woman who sued McDonalds because the coffee spilled on her cuz she was driving with it between her legs, she said it was McDonalds fault because the woman was a 90 year old woman....

people are ridiculous and it pisses me off that no one can take accountability for their actions, it is always someone elses fault. And the fact that this kid wasn't wearing a helmet... he's an idiot.
 
"Recounting the event, Malaguit said he was not wearing a helmet or

goggles and hat visibility was limited because of the dark evening sky."

what a fucking idiot
 
I couldn't agree more. The litigious culture we have cultivated is a direct result of people's refusal to accept personal responsibility for the consequences of their choices, decisions, and actions. It's fucking disgusting.
You're not entitled to monetary reward simply because tragedy befell you...especially when you yourself are culpable! It's absurd. The very definition of rampant out of control entitlement.
 
Exactly. Like we were telling her, everything says that like all injuries are your fault, there are signs in the lift line, on your pass, in the terrain park saying the resort is not responsible for all physical injuries. they practically say "you could die today"

And what is more ridiculous is that some people who make these cases for monetary compensation for their own stupidity, some of them actually win. They are always searching for loopholes, maybe they should spend that time trying to prevent their ignorance and stupidity in the first place.
 
isn't that a little harsh? Yeah it is likely his own mistake that he got hurt but this is hardly "natural selection". He wasn't trying to jump over a tiger while on fire. He was just doing what many people do. Anyone who skis (or crosses the street for that matter) is taking a risk since the activity is inherently dangerous. I wouldn't wish injury onto anyone enjoying the sport I love nor would I say anyone who was simply trying to learn the sport and hurt was "naturally selected". The only thing I have against him is that he likely isn't accepting responsibility for his own actions (can't say for sure without the facts). I can't even blame the kid either, many people will always file lawsuits if there is a chance of a big settlement. I blame the system in most of these cases.
 
i would call it not that uncommon. it's obviously not very intelligent, but i wouldn't think twice if i saw someone night skiing at my mountain not wearing a helmet or goggles.
 
Let's not wish anyone death though... come on guys. The kids doing the wrong thing but we should be wishing for the public's education on this subject, not individuals death......
 
Such a shitshow, as with every ski-related injury that turns into a lawsuit... The problem is that a kid in a wheelchair will always draw sympathy, whether he is in the wheelchair because somebody hit him with a baseball bat, because he threw himself at the ground, or even because he broke his pinky toe.

Wheelchair = sympathy where it is not always due.
 
Awesome news. Now the plaintiff just has to reimburse Sundown for the tens of thousands of dollars they wasted in legal defense fees. Oh, wait. . .

Update: I freaked out earlier in this thread and emailed the defense attorney, Ralph Monaco. He sent me a very courteous reply, offering to discuss the case with me. After I emailed him back, I never heard from him again.
 
its good that they won, but it ill happen again and this same thread will be back with a different resort and a new idiot hitting stuff he/she shouldn't.
Americans want to be "free" but as soon as we fuck up its someone else fault
 
Wow. I was expecting it to go the other way. Maybe this jury had some common sense, or kept their emotions and facts separate.
 
It seems, from the final statements to the jury anyway, that the court decided that the kid would have made his way into the terrain park anyway, even if there had been a fence around it. He knew what he was doing, its not like he accidentally went off the jump. He knew it was there.
 
how is it troubling that a person has the opportunity to have a group of its peers decide whether an action was negligible or not after listening to a fact pattern that is presented in accordance with a set of rules that are designed to promote justice?
 
Good, I'm stoked for Sundown. For the amount that they give back to the sport, they don't deserve that kind of gaper nonsense. Jarrod is the illest.
 
Search James Malaguit on facebook and he is the only result. I just left him a private message expressing my feelings towards his family's decision to file the lawsuit. I would suggest those of you over the age of 15 with intelligent and respectful comments do the same.
 
Because Sundown shouldn't be at fault for his suffering. It was self inflicted. Take note of "respectful and intelligent coments". Occasionally, voicing distaste can help to enlighten some people.
 
I would say that is well beyond acceptable. As mentioned he has only operated within the law, he lost, end of story. It is completely unacceptable to target an individual who has only operated within what is, arguably, a flawed legal system. Then there is the moral issue of targeting someone who evidently has suffered a great deal, it's basically pretty shitty of you. Instead i recommend you direct your respectful and intelligent comments towards legislators, who have the power to change these things.
 
That doesn't change the fact that he has the right to take his case to trial. Why make his life any worse. Grow up.
 
You use the word "targeting" really negatively. In the message I sent him I explained that Sundown is small mountain (possibly independently owned) struggling to break even in the no-growth ski industry. I also mentioned the Snoqualmie lawsuit and its extremely negative impact on the terrain park industry (RCR, etc.). In addition I mentioned that the recreational opportunities of myself and peers (everyone on this site) could be significantly diminished based on his case and similar lawsuits. I politely and considerately presented each of these points and ended by stating my apologies and good wishes for a steady recovery.

Directing my respectful and intelligent comments towards legislators will do absolutely nothing in this situation as they have no power in governing the downfalls of the American legal system.

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.

 
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.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top