Court’s ruling on Mt. Bachelor lawsuit sparks debate

The Oregon Supreme Court’s ruling that Mt. Bachelor’s liability waiver cannot prevent a paralyzed snowboarder from suing the ski resort has everybody talking — and while the case’s outcome is uncertain, some fear the impact on the industry and those who hit the slopes.

The justices ruled that the liability waiver was “unconscionable” and contrary to public policy, potentially opening the door for more people injured in recreational activities to file successful lawsuits.

Myles Bagley was 18 when he was hurt in 2006 at the resort west of Bend. He filed a lawsuit two years laterm seeking $21.5 million. The trial court threw out his claim, citing the liability waiver that he signed when purchasing his season pass and another that appeared on the back of his ticket.

The Supreme Court’s ruling sends the case back to the Deschutes County trial court. To win, the snowboarder will have to convince a jury that the ski resort was negligent in designing, building and maintaining the ski jump.

“I think if he wins it will have a chilling effect on the ski industry,” a local skier told NewsChannel 21 on the slopes Friday.

Bagley’s attorney told NewsChannel 21 there are some things the resort can control, and they should be held accountable, so the lawsuit was filed.

“It means the ski area, as well as the skier, must exercise reasonable care to avoid injury,” said attorney Arthur Johnson.

Mt. Bachelor attorney Andrew Balyeat said the resort was disappointed by Thursday’s ruling but is confident in their defense, it it results in a jury trial.

“We’re disappointed, but we’ll move forward and we’ll try the case to a jury,” Balyeat told The Associated Press. “We’re confident the jury will find that Mount Bachelor was not negligent in any way.”

Oregon ski resorts now will have to spend more money defending themselves against lawsuits filed by injured customers, Balyeat said.

Mt. Bachelor argued that skiing is inherently risky, and the resort has no control over many of the factors that contribute to injuries, such as the skier’s speed, course, angle and the difficulty of his aerial maneuver.

In an opinion written by Chief Justice Thomas Balmer, the court weighed a variety of factors to conclude that the liability waiver should not stand. The justices noted that there was no opportunity for Bagley to negotiate more favorable terms and the resort has more expertise than the snowboarder in determining the safety of facilities.

The justices also said the risk of lawsuits is an important incentive for ski resorts to ensure they’re creating safe conditions.

Johnson said the decision will encourage ski resorts to provide safe conditions.

“I don’t think it’s going to change the world dramatically, but hopefully it will make it a little safer,” Johnson said.

But Balyeat sees it differently.

“Most states enforce release agreements so this put Oregon in the minority of state that do not enforce release agreements,” the resort’s attorney said, adding: “Really this is uncharted territory for us.”

You can read the full ruling here:: Ore. Supreme Court ruling – Bagley v. Mt. Bachelor (PDF)