You were recently hired at Heavenly Ski Resort

You were recently hired at Heavenly Ski Resort in Lake Tahoe, CA. During the interview phase you noted that you had taken a legal studies course during college and were very interested in assisting the legal department so as to grow your knowledge of the law as it relates to business.  Now that you’re settled into your new position, legal has just met with you about a pending lawsuit against Heavenly’s parent company – The Vail Corporation. During the meeting you were told that on February 12, 2016 a woman by the name of Alyssa Rodriguez fell from the ski lift at Heavenly Ski Resort and was severely injured. She suffered a broken back and a traumatic brain injury, leaving her paralyzed from the waist down and mentally disabled.

Following hospitalization, Mrs. Rodriguez now requires around-the-clock assistance. As a result, Mrs. Rodriguez’s husband – Javier – moved her to Coral Gables, Florida, where they are originally from, so that family could assist in her care. Medical bills have exceeded $100,000 and Mrs. Rodriguez, formerly an accountant, claims she is so disabled she is no longer able to work.

Mrs. Rodriguez has brought suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida against The Vail Corporation, which is domiciled in Colorado, for the injuries that occurred to her at Heavenly. She asserts in her complaint that employees were negligent in the maintenance of the chair lift which resulted in her fall. Additionally, she asserts that medical care was hindered from reaching her in a timely fashion due to impassible roads owned and maintained by Heavenly Ski Resort, thus exacerbating her already grievous injuries.

In her complaint, Mrs. Rodriguez asserts that the chair lift did not have a functioning safety gate to keep passengers from falling. Additionally, Mrs. Rodriguez asserts that her fixed-grip chairlift swung violently in the wind during her ride. She asserts that the connection between the cable and the fixed-grip attachment was so rusted the chair itself was not stationary but able to swing back and forth during the journey. Additionally, due to her light frame, Mrs. Rodriguez asserts that she should not have been placed on the “quad” chairlift alone, as it was windy and weight was necessary to keep the already faulty fixed-grip from allowing the chair to move.

She asserts that employees of Heavenly were stationed at the entrance and exit to the chairlift and told her to get on as a solo passenger. She also maintains that the staff at heavenly failed to inspect the clearly visible rusted fixed-grip attaching the chair to the cable, which they are required to do weekly per The Vail Company safety manual, and that safety roads on-site, which are owned and maintained by Heavenly for the use of staff and medical vehicles, were not plowed following a morning snowfall – thus making them impassible for the emergency vehicles requested by staff after her fall was reported.

Mrs. Rodriguez also noted in her complaint that she was “forced” to sign a waiver form in order to ski at Heavenly. She noted that the trip to the Lake Tahoe area was an expensive vacation and entrance to the ski resort had already been paid for prior to arriving. Only after arrival was she asked to sign the waiver form. She asserts that signage around the lodge as well as Heavenly staff informed her that signing the waiver is required of all guests who intend to use the ski facilities. She stated that she overheard the staff routinely inform guests that if they did not sign the waiver form they were welcome to stay in the lodge but could not ski or snowboard on the slopes. She says she signed without reading the document, as it was one of three forms included in her ski equipment rental.

The Vail Company seeks legal advice on whether they face liability in this complaint and any defenses that can be raised against the litigation. Your supervisor mentioned something about choice of forum clauses, contracts of adhesion, and assumption of risk.

Format

The following component parts are required of your memorandum. Please note that different (equally acceptable) names for the same components exist, as shown below.

Heading (To:, From:, Date:, Re:)

Address your memo to “Supervising Attorney”

Question(s) Presented/Issue(s) Presented

I highly suggest either the “under/can/when” or “whether/under/when” format.

Brief Answers

Discussion

I highly suggest using the CREAC method.

Conclusion

 

Font must be 12pt Times New Roman.

Double line spaced paragraphs.

1” margins.

Left justified body text, centered point heading text.

At least five pages in length, no more than ten.