 Poster: A snowHead
|
A US skier has been awarded $14 million damages against the Summit at Snoqualmie ski resort in Washington State.
An incorrectly designed ski jump which resulted in a bad landing and quadriplegia for the victim, Kenny Salvini, resulted in the resort being sued and damages of $31 million being awarded. These were reduced after calculating Salvini's contributory fault and the inherent risk of skiing.
The jump had reportedly caused injuries to 15 other skiers and snowboarders in the winter of 2003-4, but had not been modified or closed.
Salvini's damages were based on claimed costs of $23 million and $26 million for his lifetime's medical and care needs.
This report from The Olympian.
Any comments?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Quote: |
| "Going off this jump was the equivalent of jumping off a three-story building," Connelly said. "If you're going to be throwing kids 37 feet in the air, these jumps need to be engineered, designed and constructed properly." |
.
Says it all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Yes, though any kind of ski jumping on alpine skis is best avoided, in my book. Even well-designed landings will take their toll on knees etc. Several of my friends have had their bodies permanently damaged by bad landings (or even regular landings).
It's interesting that resorts - even those blessed with the most outstanding natural terrain - are increasingly sculpting parks and jumps. To avoid liability issues I guess they've always got to prove that they consulted the best available expertise in designing them. It would be interesting to know if any European resorts have had to settle claims like this.
I wonder how Snoqualmie's insurers are going to respond to the $14 million settlement? When I visited the resort about 15 years ago - it's an interesting place (the 'Summit' refers, I think, to the pass it's on) - they had recently had a case of someone on the tube run riding an inflatable tyre who'd broken his neck. I think he hit someone in front.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
David Goldsmith, Our snowparks have both been diesigined by a specialist brought in for the job (as with the other "canyon" runs), who stayed 2 or 3 years and has trained one or two locals to take over now. However, the big airs are not always open and there is always someone in attendance to ensure that no-one unsuitable is allowed to go off them.
Incredible the apparent replacement in the States of suing instead of Duty of Care.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
15people injured on a kicker over a season is not some horrific stat, in fact for a huge kicker I'd say it's a fairly low toll? How serious were these injuries? It's a bit like road traffic accident stats in the UK, XXX DEATHS and injuries - the injuries might be no more than a bruised lip.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ballistics is a relatively well known branch of physics. Gravitational acceleration and projectile motion are taught in high school physics classes, so is conservation of energy. It is a relatively simple thing to convert height at the start to velocity at the jump to maximam range, add a reasonable amount for wind speed and extend the landing zone well beyond that. When several jumpers overshoot the landing zone, it should have made them review their (lack of) engineering calculations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Winterhighland, I agree, after all how many people get injured on any given piste over the course of a season?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Quote: |
When several jumpers overshoot the landing zone
|
?
I don't see that in the report link.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The report in The Olympian says:
| Quote: |
| During the five-week trial at the Regional Justice Center in Kent, engineers and an aeronautics professor from the University of California, Davis, testified the jump was improperly designed and featured a short landing area. |
If the landing area was short then Ghost's probably right that the skiers were overshooting it and landing on the flat.
Incidently, five weeks is remarkably long for a ski accident trial, though these were clearly very high stakes. The defence probably mounted a very strong allegation of contributory negligence by the skier, and seemingly achieved a big reduction in the (enormous) damages but it just goes to show what a big money business the law can be. Having met quite a few barristers involved in ski litigation, they do a lot of work on percentages and chances.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| ...(enormous) damages but it just goes to show what a big money business the law can be. |
I think that's putting the cart before the horse. It shows what "big money business" life is. $14M - call it £7M - might generate £350,000 pa income (5%). Call it £200,000 after tax (in the UK, anyway). That unfortunate guy is going to require 24/365 care: a minimum of four people (3 eight-hour shifts plus weekend and holiday cover). There wouldn't be a lot of change out of £200k once unsocial hours are taken into account. Then there's adaptation of the guy's home, his loss of earnings, etc, etc. Personally, I'd say the award was modest (assuming negligence).
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
I suspect a little Darwinism here. At the age of 27, you should be able to make your own risk assessment before getting some big air i.e watch other people take on the jump, judge you own ability etc. At the end of the day it's your own life at stake, so it's not wise to trust it blindly to others. However I do agree that terrain parks should be professionally designed and monitored to minimise the risks. Sounds like there was a degree of negligence in this case, so the verdict was probably fair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
