Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Careful who you ski with....

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Careful who you ski with....

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...eath-1.2448605
    “Taking away someone’s opinion is no different than sewing a man’s butthole shut.”

  • #2
    **** this bitch. Sorry to be brutal, in particular to a woman who has suffered such a loss, but **** this bitch.

    Sorry to see Canadians have no greater sense of decency than 'Mericuns.

    There are concepts of honor and decency and self-responsibility, which are different than legal accountability, and our society needs to stop confusing the two.

    Especially in the backcountry.
    Last edited by Baaahb; 3 December 2013, 09:24 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      It is nice to see we Americans are dragging our suit happy ways up to the great white north.
      Last edited by James; 3 December 2013, 09:25 AM.

      Comment


      • #4
        What a freakin' nightmare. You go to the mountains, pay big money for heli/guide service, get paired with a random guy and suddenly you're legally responsible for that guy. If the company isn't liable, then the client certainly shouldn't be.
        Yay!...(Drool)


        Comment


        • #5
          Last year I was on a cat day at Monarch. I was by myself and got paired up with a random guy with narrow skis and zero powder experience. In the deeper snow in the trees he would fall every 100 feet. After a couple of runs I was thinking about pushing him in to a tree well so may be there is some merit to this suit. The guy was a trial lawyer.
          Last edited by James; 3 December 2013, 09:35 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Does anyone know if the disclaimers one signs say anything about this buddy system? My guess is that people would refuse to sign a disclaimer that purported to include any assignment of responsibility for one's buddy.

            Comment


            • #7
              This'll get tossed out of court, I bet....at least as far as the client is concerned.
              Yay!...(Drool)


              Comment


              • #8
                Someone in the comments in that article pointed out that the plaintiff and the deceased are from the US (Colorado). No surprise.

                Good luck with that lady. Death by tree well is an unforeseen accident as it far as it gets. You fall in a tree well it's your own damn fault for skiing too close in the trees. It's more likely that the deceased probably took off and didn't wait so that he could be spotted at all times. Powder fever and all.

                And considering that she already gets $18mil from his death and wants more? Nobody can sympathize with that. What a wretch.
                Drive the cuff!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Baaahb View Post
                  **** Sorry to see Canadians have no greater sense of decency than 'Mericuns..
                  Reading comprehension much? And you an attorney. Tsk tsk.........
                  “Taking away someone’s opinion is no different than sewing a man’s butthole shut.”

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by BillyFromTheHills View Post
                    This'll get tossed out of court, I bet....at least as far as the client is concerned.
                    It will still cost him money for his defense unless the court somehow rules that the plaintiff has to reimburse his legal fees.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Yup........
                      Yay!...(Drool)


                      Comment


                      • #12
                        And she already got $18M from her deceased husband. What, did the "ski buddy" call her to say that her husband was a douchebag, lousy skier, and deserved to die?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          What follows is just speculation but....


                          I suspect that the widow was advised by her lawyer that her prospects of getting damages from the heli ski operator were minimal. In part because of a very well known case brought against CMH heli skiing about two decades ago, where they didn't even get to the waiver issue before the court summarily ruled for the defendant. And this suit was brought by the widow with verrrrry deep pockets. Like, her deceased husband's estate was in the billions. Anyways, I'm not a lawyer, but I had a great time reading the judgement in that case, super fascinating stuff: http://www.avalanche-center.org/Prof...baystreet.html (In part, because the judge is a good writer, who clearly spells out the standards for negligence and criminal negligence. Very educational for me.)

                          Anyways, I wonder if she called up her lawyer, and was pushing for a case. Maybe they said "well, your chances against Weigele are pretty much zero, but maybe go after the 'ski buddy'."

                          Just speculating, of course.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I apologize for denigrating Canadians. My faith in the great north is restored. I will, however, still refer to them as beaverheads on occasion.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by dschane View Post
                              And she already got $18M from her deceased husband. What, did the "ski buddy" call her to say that her husband was a douchebag, lousy skier, and deserved to die?
                              More likely he apologized to her as he felt some sense of guilt and she took it as an invitation to sue. I repeat my opening comments.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X