Freeman

Freeman v. Hale

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 1261·30 Cal. App. 4th 1388·36 Cal. Rptr. 2d 418·94 Daily Journal DAR 17643·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9557
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 15, 1994E012018California3,344 words

Opinion

Opinion

McKINSTER, J.

Plaintiffs appeal from a summary judgment entered against them in their action for damages for personal injuries and loss of consortium. We reverse. In doing so, we hold that (1) the consumption of alcoholic beverages is not an activity which is within the range of activities involved in the sport of downhill snow skiing; (2) to the extent the consumption of alcohol increases the risk of collision between the drinking skier and other skiers, that increased risk is not one which is inherent in the sport; and (3) therefore the other skiers have not assumed that increased risk merely by participating in the sport.

Factual Background

At 3 p.m. on November 26, 1986, Deborah Freeman (Freeman), a 21-year-old, experienced skier, boarded a chartered bus in Riverside for a 5-day ski trip sponsored by the Ski Club of Riverside Community College. Defendant Curtis Hale was also on the bus. They arrived at a hotel in Utah at 7 a.m. the next morning, checked in, changed clothes, and reboarded the bus for Snowbird Mountain.

They began skiing at approximately 9 a.m. Freeman and Hale skied with a group of two or three other people throughout the day. While the parties disagree as to how…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.