|
3805 A ski resort employee who engages in snowboarding on her own initiative while at a company party is not restricted to workers' compensation remedies against the employer; an employer who is sued by an employee for injuries that occurred under circumstances that prevented the employee from being classified as an employee for workers' compensation purposes is not prevented from raising a defense based on assumption of the risk; a defendant who increased the inherent risks of snowboarding by modifying a jump and making it excessively dangerous may have thereby violated a duty and is not protected from liability by primary assumption of the risk; a plaintiff's voluntary encounter with a known risk is a secondary assumption of the risk that can result in the apportionment of fault to plaintiff without regard to whether plaintiff's conduct was unreasonable; a hold harmless agreement that expressly assumes the risks of skiing does not necessarily preclude an action for injuries sustained while snowboarding.CitationVINE v BEAR VALLEY (Ski Resort Party) 118 CA4 577 [See: LabC 3352, 2801; Knight v Jewett 3 C4 296, T/AT 10/92]
|
|
