legal news


Register | Forgot Password

TOWNS v. DAVIDSON

TOWNS v. DAVIDSON
02:24:2007

TOWNS v


TOWNS v. DAVIDSON


Filed 2/2/07


CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION


 


 


 


IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA


THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT


(Mono)


----







KAREN J. TOWNS,


          Plaintiff and Appellant,


     v.


HERBERT J. DAVIDSON et al.,


          Defendants and Respondents.



C050829


(Super. Ct. No. 14954)



     APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Mono County, Edward Forstenzer, J.  Affirmed.


     Kelegian White & Reed and Michael R. White; Stewart Humpherys Burchett & Molin, Richard J. Molin and Edward V. Rizzuto for Plaintiff and Appellant.


     Lauria Tokunaga Gates & Linn and Mark D. Tokunaga for Defendant and Respondent.


The trial court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment, concluding the doctrine of primary assumption of risk barred plaintiff from recovering damages for injuries she suffered when a ski resort employee collided with her while both were skiing.  We affirm.


FACTS


In March 2002, defendant Herbert J. Davidson (Davidson) was employed by defendant Mammoth Mountain Ski Area (Mammoth) as a ski host manager.  Part of his job duties included skiing the slopes, checking with other ski hosts on the hill, and talking to the guests.  He also was allowed to ski one or two runs during the day, and on occasion could do so with a spouse, relative or friend.  At those times, he would still be on duty as a ski host and would be wearing a Mammoth uniform.  Mammoth's policy manual for hosts, the Host Manual, required him to â€





Description Under primary assumption of risk doctrine, skier assumes risk of injury resulting from collision with another skier, including an employee of ski resort, even if employee is violating company policies by skiing unsafely. Employee of ski resort did not act recklessly and thus did not increase risks inherent in sport so as to take case outside the primary assumption of risk doctrine where evidence showed that, at worst, employee skied fast and aggressively and was inattentive to plaintiff, who was skiing to his left and whom he did not see in time to avoid collision.
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale