|
3172 A question of fact existed as to whether a hold-harmless agreement that was part of a season ski-pass good for use Mondays through Fridays applied to skiing on a Sunday, for which plaintiff purchased a day use ski-pass that did not contain such an agreement; implied assumption of the risk does prevent liability for injuries sustained by a recreational skier who unknowingly encountered man-made ski jumps created for a ski race, because encountering them was not an inherent risk of recreational skiing.CitationSOLIS v KIRKWOOD (A/R Ski-Jumps) 94 CA4 354 [See: Tunkl v Regents 60 C2 92; Olsen v Breeze 48 CA4 608, T/AT 9/96; Westlye v Look 17 CA4 1715, T/AT 11/93; Randas v YMCA 17 CA4 158, T/AT 9/93; Allabach v Santa Clara 46 CA4 1007, T/AT 7/96; Van Dyke v Ski Ltd 67 CA4 1310, T/AT 12/98; Connelly v Mammoth 39 CA4 8, T/AT 11/95]
|
|
