Busy legal schedule for Mt. Hood ski area operators

[Dan]

<a href="http://bikeportland.org/2010/08/26/owner-of-mt-hood-ski-bowl-pleads-guilty-to-hit-and-run-duii-and-assault-38539#more-38539">Owner of Mt. Hood Ski Bowl pleads guilty to hit-and-run, DUII, and assault</a>

What a jerk, and way to reinforce all the bad stereotypes about Cayenne drivers. Fortunately, it sounds like the victim wasn't seriously hurt.

Meadows has a lawsuit too, over a <a href="http://blogs.wweek.com/news/2010/08/25/juicy-suits-slammed-by-a-rock-at-mount-hood-meadows/">falling rock that hit a teenager riding with her parents in Clark Canyon.</a>

That case strikes me as blatant profiteering. If you're going to take your kid back to Clark Canyon (which requires passing through a backcountry gate), step up and take some responsibility if something happens.

[queequeg]

<a href="http://bikeportland.org/2010/08/26/owner-of-mt-hood-ski-bowl-pleads-guilty-to-hit-and-run-duii-and-assault-38539#more-38539">Owner of Mt. Hood Ski Bowl pleads guilty to hit-and-run, DUII, and assault</a>

What a jerk, and way to reinforce all the bad stereotypes about Cayenne drivers. Fortunately, it sounds like the victim wasn't seriously hurt.

Wow ... what an utter sleazoid. Incredible that the cyclist wasn't instantly killed. Doesn't surprise me that he was in a luxury SUV at all. My experience riding in NYC is that the deadliest drivers are ~40 year old men in SUV's, and in particular, luxury SUV's. It drives me nuts how drivers like this get away with such small penalties.

[b0ardski]

Stories like this always bring to mind the song Gold Krugerrand by Styx;

...justice for money, what more can we say, we all know it,s the american way...

The cyclist should wring him out in civil court.

in other news

I love this response,

The suit alleges Mount Hood Meadows was negligent in four ways:

1. Failing to evaluate the risk of falling rocks given the weather and conditions.

2. Failing to close the Clark Canyon ski run when Mount Hood Meadows should have known the risk.

3. Failing to warn skiers of dangerous conditions.

4. Failing to act on information the resort had, or should have had, about falling rocks at the same place before that day.

The suit, filed by Portland lawyer J. Randolph Pickett, seeks $397,406.37 for medical bills, and pain and suffering.

1. <cite class="fn">Michael Jensen</cite> says:
   August 25, 2010 at 10:59 pm
   The State of Oregon Department of Child Welfare should remove young girl from the home of those negligent parents for:
   1. Failing to evaluate the risk of skiing in general and not being aware that skiing is a risky endeavor.
   2. Failing to keep their daughter from recklessly engaging in such risky activity.
   3. Failing to outfit their daughter in a suit of armor which could have possibly protected her from such injury.
   4. Failing to act on information they had, or should have had, about the risks of skiing.