Denali, snow pickets and lawsuit

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 21 - 30 of total 30 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
May 31, 2013 - 01:56pm PT
The issue of liability on climbs has been around a rather long time. The first time I ran across it was in 1967 when Summit published an article discussing the duty of care a climber owed his or her partner. That article brought forth a strong reaction by several, decrying the author's "bottomless appetite for torts" because the partner didn't do enough, e.g.

Most of us are instinctively appalled when we consider such a suit by one climber against another for a climbing injury, but those sorts of things happen in everyday life all the time. If a passenger gets injured in an accident caused by the driver's negligence, the passenger commonly sues (or at least makes a claim against) the driver. Perhaps we see that differently because of the presence of insurance covering such a risk, but the situation legally strikes me as no different from receiving a negligent belay from your partner, causing an accident.

In any case, I think a guiding situation has an implied contract (if not a written one), with duties expected of the guide that may exceed those expected from a partner. While disclaimers can limit that liability, public policy (i.e., what judges think) often limits the exculpatory ability of such disclaimers, particularly if they purport to shield the guide from liability for negligence.

I suspect, though, that we see relatively few lawsuits over climbing accidents because climbers, as a rule, don't have that many assets. Torts need deep pockets for lawyers to take the case.

John
climbski2

Mountain climber
Anchorage AK, Reno NV
May 31, 2013 - 02:02pm PT
Survival

WILL RINDOM?? Are you freeking kidding me?!!

I recognized him immediately, and had to look at your text again to double check names!

Will is an old friend, and I still (not enough) stay in touch with him!

Can't believe I just saw a picture of Will Rindom on Supertopo, awesome, mutter mutter smile.....

Awesome. Climbing is such a small world isn't it. At most 1 degree of separation from just about everyone.

Will was always a good guy. Didn't climb with him so much as work for the same guiding company and in SAR. Always struck me as a solid pleasant friendly person. Class act to be sure. I think he moved from Alaska a year or so after 1991.
survival

Big Wall climber
Terrapin Station
May 31, 2013 - 03:14pm PT
Classy guy, that's a FACT!

Although his movements since 1991, and current whereabouts are highly classified information....

CHEERS!
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
May 31, 2013 - 03:48pm PT
John E - can you define, for the purpose of liability, the difference between negligence and gross negligence?

I think what you are calling a disclaimer is what we call a "waiver of liability". My understanding is that this waives liability of stated risks so long as gross negligence of duty is not proven. As I understand it If a professional follows recognized professional practices and guidelines then the waiver protects them from liability ( they are merely negligent in not preventing injury).

If they fail in their professional conduct, they expose themselves to liability regardless of a waiver and are found to be "grossly negligent".

True? False?
guido

Trad climber
Santa Cruz/New Zealand/South Pacific
May 31, 2013 - 06:25pm PT
Come on Werner, get your ass out of the trash bin and give us some sweet words of Pissmetology concerning lawyers and climbing.
wbw

Trad climber
'cross the great divide
May 31, 2013 - 07:26pm PT
Once the two guys walked away from the accident scene, they chose to confront the dangers of the mountain on their own. If the guide never had a chance to talk with them to organize a plan after the fall, how can the park service conclude that an ensolite pad and a shovel could have prevented the death? That's ridiculous. Does the NPS really have people that believe their 10 recommendations will make climbing the COLDEST MOUNTAIN ON EARTH safer? If they really want to prevent deaths, they should just shut the mountain down to guiding.

Once the legal perspective is brought into situations like this, the guide is gonna get screwed, just like Bridwell did in the Tetons. The lawyer for the plaintiff will attack every decision the guide has ever made in the field, as if he/she knows the level of commitment required for the guide to give up his parka in those conditions. F' em, scrawny little ambulance chasing maggots . .

When I was a beginning climber, I looked up to those Teton guides thinking they've got the best gig imaginable. Years later, after I became a Teton guide I found out what a miserable job it was for me. Guys in the office are gonna put everyone that can lace their boots (and some that can't) on the mountain because the guide service needs the money, during a very short season. I had some great clients, and I had some terrible ones. Be sure the guy that died was one of the latter, simply based on the fact that his family is suing over this. The bad ones will criticize the guide if they don't get the summit, even if the weather prevents it, because they by-God paid for a summit. I found this conflict of interest always present, and decided I'd rather make my living schlepping out cajun food at Lucille's in Boulder.

If this accident had happened in Europe, the lawsuit would never happen. People would shrug their shoulders and say, "well, that's a risk of going into the mountains." But not here. People are gonna point the finger regardless of circumstance. This lame attitude is totally encouraged by lawyers and our legal system. It's pathetic.

Someone should ask the question, what is it we really want to see happen (other than enrich a money-grubbing lawyer) as a result of this lawsuit. If the best that can happen is the NPS 10 recommendations, I would argue it is a complete waste. Pathetic.
Don Paul

Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
May 31, 2013 - 07:54pm PT
Bruce what you write is confusing because waivers are part of contract law and negligence is tort law. In most states gross negligence requires at least willfull disregard of the person's rights. ie you know you are doing something to someone.

The guide could be sued for negligence with or without a contract, and if there is a contract, the contract terms wouldn't be the end of the tort liability. The 'waiver' could be used to support an affirmative defense, such as one proposed here, assumption of risk, but you would still look at the proximate cause of the accident and if the guide was negligent, he's liable.

I dont agree with the suit though, and hope the guiding company can at least a free expert witness to tell the court about the risks and safety measures used. It would be a battle of mountaineering experts if it actually went to court.
Fat Dad

Trad climber
Los Angeles, CA
May 31, 2013 - 08:57pm PT
Don raised an important issue by pointing out that in a cases such as these the fact finder, whether it be a jury or the court, will likely rely heavily on the opinion testimony of an expert witness to establish what the appropriate level of care is/was and whether the guide breached that duty. In the Bridwell case, I believe that both sides had pretty heavy hitters tesify on behalf of their respective sides. So much for the theory that clueless juries just hand out money.

I do want to follow up on my earlier post however and state that, while guides more or less ask for it by taking clueless couch surfers into the mountains, that does not absolve the would 7 Summiteer from exercising a little self introspection and concluding that he or she really does not belong there. Will I ever go on along ocean voyage with only one person who knows how to sail the boat? No, because if something happened to that person I know I'd be totally screwed. Why are the mountains any different?
Sierra Ledge Rat

Mountain climber
Old and Broken Down in Appalachia
Jun 1, 2013 - 05:31am PT
I am a lawyer

Credit: Sierra Ledge Rat

"They have no lawyers among them, for they consider them as a sort of people whose profession it is to disguise matters."
--Sir Thomas More (1478 - 1535)

"If it weren't for lawyers, we wouldn't need them."
--Unknown

"A fox may steal your hens, sir . . . . If lawyer's hand is fee'd, sir He steals your whole estate."
--John Gay (1685 - 1732)

"Lawyers are the only persons in whom ignorance of the law is not punished."
--Jeremy Bentham (1748 - 1832)

Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Jun 1, 2013 - 09:36am PT
Will I ever go on along ocean voyage with only one person who knows how to sail the boat? No, because if something happened to that person I know I'd be totally screwed. Why are the mountains any different?

I like to think similarly but when you get right down to it, I suspend that imperative every time I jump into an airplane or helicopter and for all practical purposes, when i trust a bus or taxi driver or even my daughter not to crash the car and kill me. Many people treat what they want out of the mountains the same way so they hire a guide and it generally works out fine for everyone involved.

The issue of negligence vs gross negligence is one of all parties clearly understanding the risks, a duty of those responsible to reasonably mitigate the risks, and both parties agreeing to accepting those terms. If injury or loss occurs under those terms that is negligence. If any of the above terms is not met then that is gross negligence on the part of the service provider.

Or maybe I'm wrong, but that is my non expert understanding due to my recollection of the expert explanation of Canadian law from a number of years ago.


The snow picket thing is relevant here in squamish because occasionally people fix ropes on some rock climbs for the sole purpose of allowing anybody with a rope grab to solo in a safe manner. Sometimes the ropes are left in place for a whole season and all manner of people are all over it and this is well understood by the rope installer / service provider.

What is the liability exposure of the service provider? No money changes hands but what difference does that make? Under the above terms much is assumed or implied, but you can say much the same thing for any bolt on any climb. I suppose the legal liability of such a situation has to be tested at some point but i sure hope I'm never involved.

I hope the Swiss family lose their case.
Messages 21 - 30 of total 30 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews