# Snowboarder falls in park, breaks neck, sues Burton...



## MarshallV82 (Apr 6, 2011)

Sick-Pow said:


> Demoing boards.....16 years old at the time. I call douchbaggery.
> 
> Paralyzed snowboarder gets go ahead to sue - Nova Scotia - CBC News
> 
> ...


Kid/family are douchebags. It's a tragic accident but this whole trend of blaming others for your stupid actions is ridiculous. Not surprising though. 

It's kinda crazy how much resorts are liable for out east. This wouldn't even be a case if it happened in CO.


----------



## ETM (Aug 11, 2009)

So unfortunate but IMO he is a piece of shit. Take responsibility of your actions people.


----------



## TheNorminator (Jan 6, 2013)

This disgusts me. The kid singed a waiver and bought a lift ticket to the resort. If you bother to read the back of a lift ticket or any snow-related waiver, you'll know that they pretty much say you can't sue them because skiing and snowboarding are inherently dangerous sports, and you are accepting the danger by purchasing a ticket/signing the waiver. 

This is horseshit. The kid went into the park on a demo board, fell, and is now paralyzed. Nobody but himself was the cause of his paralysis. He can't blame burton, because it's a demo board and he should have been smart and taken it easy, since he was unfamiliar with the board. He can't sue the ski resort, because it's his fault he chose to go into the terrain park. But he has to find someone to blame, right? :dunno:

This reminds me of the story where a woman crashed into a groomer (while racing her friend)) and got her legs chopped off, and then proceeded to sue the ski resort AND the cat company. WTF? Should I sue craftsman if I cut my toe off with a lawnmower?

These people should accept that they injured themselves, and no one else.

/rantover


----------



## koi (May 16, 2013)

MarshallV82 said:


> Kid/family are douchebags. It's a tragic accident but this whole trend of blaming others for your stupid actions is ridiculous. Not surprising though.
> 
> It's kinda crazy how much resorts and shit are liable for out east. This wouldn't even be a case if it happened in CO.


What are you talking about, CO has had people sue for stupid shit also. People ducking ropes, dying, and their families suing. It's all about trying to blame others for your stupidity or bad luck.

This particular stupidity is on the judge who said it was cool to sue them. I mean seriously "failed to warn about the dangers of testing a board," this kid is fucking retarded. I feel bad that the kid is paralyzed, but what really sucks (in my opinion) is that he is going to get the money. Burton and Wentworth are going to pay him to end the lawsuit, which will open the doors for others to follow... 

This is a dangerous sport-cowboy up.


----------



## DiggerXJ (Apr 4, 2013)

As soon as the defense proves this kid has been riding that park for years, it'll be done with. Shame a Darwin Award isn't possible in this case. That kid and family are scum.


----------



## koi (May 16, 2013)

It is worth an Honorable Mention.

And I don't know about the defense part, sometimes it is cheaper to payoff then to let the lawyers battle it out.


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

Man, it is a fucking heavy price he has to pay. Burton, ski area are definitely not at fault. What a tough pill to swallow though. Douche bag kid eh? What would be a good penalty? Paralysed from the neck down? Jesus. 

Sorry it happened to him. Probably not going to get far with this one. This is just going to be more heartache. 

Paralysed. Fuck me...


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

koi said:


> What are you talking about, CO has had people sue for stupid shit also. People ducking ropes, dying, and their families suing. It's all about trying to blame others for your stupidity or bad luck.
> 
> This particular stupidity is on the judge who said it was cool to sue them. I mean seriously "failed to warn about the dangers of testing a board," this kid is fucking retarded. I feel bad that the kid is paralyzed, but what really sucks (in my opinion) is that he is going to get the money. Burton and Wentworth are going to pay him to end the lawsuit, which will open the doors for others to follow...
> 
> This is a dangerous sport-cowboy up.


Actually Marshall is dead on with this one. It would not go far. You can look back at the last ten-twenty years,ost cases like this are done at the hearing/discovery phase. The most recent ones are a bit different. Negligence is the one thing resorts are responsible for, with these avalanche related deaths inbounds, there is some argument of that. 

I don't think there is much of a case the Vail or Winterpark incidents, but these are not the standard case either. Imo, the WP case is probably a stronger one for the plaintiff than Vail. Then again I am not a lawyer so take my thoughts with a bag of salt. 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## slyder (Jan 18, 2010)

This kid falsely presented himself and signed a waiver pretending to be an age he's not. Why isnt the liability on him 100%. I feel bad for the injury he suffered but all he is doing is going after deep pockets. I don't feel D-bag is a false claim.

I demoed a park board last year and if wasnt detuned obviously and I ate it on a corregated pipe, road rashed my face pretty good if anyone remembers the pics from last year. I never thought to blame the shop that let me use the board.
It was my fault for not having the fore thought to hit some park features with super sharp edges. I was so excited to demo this board I thought I really wanted super sharp edges were the last thing I thought of.


----------



## jml22 (Apr 10, 2012)

Calm down everyone
You can sue for anything... nothing to stop you. 
Now just because you can sue, doesn't mean anything is going to happen


----------



## Bones (Feb 24, 2008)

All this kid has done is win the right to sue. To my understanding, all that means is that the court has decided that this isn't a frivolous lawsuit.

He's claiming negligence for the lack of supervision in the terrain park, for staff failing to check his age and for a lack of warning about something. While I don't think he'll win, failing to check his age for the waiver is probably a big enough deal that court decided his case had a serious enough argument to be allowed to go forward.

I assume his argument is sort of like a car dealership letting a 10 year old test drive a car without verifying that they have a valid driver's license.

Unfortunately, at the end of the day, this is probably the only chance his family has got....not many 16 year olds carry disability insurance. I don't think I'd be calling anyone a douchbag, I think I'd call them desperate.


----------



## jml22 (Apr 10, 2012)

This probably won't even make it to court.
The companies lawyers will show them he has signed, is a regular at the mountain, so on so on so on.... they say "if we goto court you will have to pay approximately xXXXX for our fees"
Done
Only way they'll goto court is if burton or the mountain made the kid demo and go up the mountain and attempt the trick... like "Hey can we get a video of you on this board, doing this trick?"


----------



## MarshallV82 (Apr 6, 2011)

It's poor taste to sue for that. Period. I'd hope the resort or some non profit group kinda helps out the kid a little. I'm sure it's more the parents trying to make a buck off their their sons misfortune. 

I wouldn't wish his accident on anyone, but it happens. How does Canada handle disabled people anyway? 

Douchebag was rash, but it's not right. 
Much like this link that was in the comments. 

http://http://sci.rutgers.edu/forum/archive/index.php/t-45860.html

2.9 million awarded? that's excessive.


----------



## jml22 (Apr 10, 2012)

Well i'm sure they're just trying to cover bills to be honest
Wheelchairs and outfitting your house to be wheelchair firendly is really expensive.... im' sure if they have a decent case that's what they will settle for


----------



## Dekker (Feb 8, 2013)

I'm sure somewhere in the waiver it states you need to be 18 yrs+ to demo their boards. Burton may have failed to check his age but at what point does the kid take responsibility? Many times I lied to get M rated games when I was only 12, I'm sure if management found out the employee would get in trouble but am I not also to blame for knowingly deceiving them? Can't know for sure but a part of me thinks he knew it was supposed to be 18 yrs old but didn't speak up because freeeee demo boarddddd session. 

The last time Burton was up at our mountain to do demo's, the waiver clearly said that the individual needed to be minimum 18 years of age along with the other legal mumbo jumbo. I don't think the whole "I didn't know because I didn't read it" will get you far in court, as that shows ignorance for not spending 2 mins to read a paper.

My company has been sued multiple times for people not carefully reading a contract they signed and then getting pissy about it. The lawyers just bring up the signed contract with their signature below the "I have fully read and understood the terms and conditions etc" and it's case closed.


----------



## Jed (May 11, 2011)

Don't forget that liability waivers aren't always bulletproof. They don't always hold up in court and the kid being underage just complicates things even more.

Even though Burton would likely win the case, it'll probably be cheaper and less effort for them to settle the case out of court by throwing a small sum of money at the family. That's just how the legal system works unfortunately.


----------



## Kevin137 (May 5, 2013)

As someone who IS suing another party, i understand, but there is liability and stupidity, and this is a liability held wholly by the "child" who decided to deceive to obtain something for free, even if it was only a temporary situation.

Could Burton have him charged with obtaining by deception...??? If a criminal act is committed that would surely leave him no case to claim...!!!

My case is slightly different, i am suing a housing management company for failing to maintain a property, the long and short of it is, i bought a property that had emergency lighting that was never connected, and due to a problem with the lights constantly tripping out, it was always dark, however, i complained 37 times over a period of 37 months, and they still denied i had raised it as an issue and 5 years later have not settled, although they have admitted liability now... What the payout will be is another matter, as i still have ongoing pain, discomfort, sleepless nights, can't sit for periods, etc etc, but i have got on with my life, and whatever they pay will not make up for the pain i went through... Or the future discomfort...


----------



## Deacon (Mar 2, 2013)

"being responsible" and "being liable" are very different. A 16 year old can be held responsible for his decisions, but is rarely LEGALLY liable for them.


----------



## chomps1211 (Mar 30, 2011)

Jed said:


> Don't forget that liability waivers aren't always bulletproof. They don't always hold up in court and the kid being underage just complicates things even more....


^this^

I have no comment on the merits or lack of regarding the kids case, but with the kid being underage, that does complicate any contractual agreement.

I know I was actually shocked when I bought my first board from REI and I had to sign a liability waiver to purchase certain snowboarding gear!!! I thought WTF? I get doing that for renting out equipment, but for buying _Boots_??? :blink:


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

This family is definitely trying to find a way to have bills paid. This kid now faces the rest of his life like that. Even with his now shortened life span he could make it to his 60's. You are talking millions of dollars in costs and unless he is some super theoretical genius, probably not much he can do to support that. 

It just sucks to know you are going to be on the receiving end of that fuck stick for decades. So yeah desperate. Also, if they can't afford the costs, after going broke, spending their savings, probably losing their home and everything. The taxpayer will then get to pick up the costs. That also sucks. 

If anything this should serve as a reminder to how you ride. Sure push it, but keep in mind what you are doing and if there is a better way. You can't avoid it all, but I would like to not be on the receiving end of that fuck stick if I can avoid it.


----------



## Kevin137 (May 5, 2013)

killclimbz said:


> It just sucks to know you are going to be on the receiving end of that fuck stick for decades. So yeah desperate. Also, if they can't afford the costs, after going broke, spending their savings, probably losing their home and everything. The taxpayer will then get to pick up the costs. That also sucks.


Is that not the point though, he will always be provided for, albeit badly by all accounts, if he had chosen to insure himself or his parents had chosen to insure him, then this legal action would not be happening, and i still think misrepresentation IS a criminal act, and as such, if he was prosecuted for that, his legal stance may lose all it's weight...

I personally, think if i was Burton or the Resort, i would be looking to prosecute to put an end to this...

I don;t know the law in the USA, but i'm sure there are laws for this, there are just about every other 1st world country, even if they are not widely used, it makes sense for him to be made to pay for the cost of dishonesty... And that may well be a $50 fine, but it is what it is, and profiting from a criminal act should be illegal anyway...!!!


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

Well if he is a Canadian citizen, he had to be insured. They have universal healthcare. I'm sure it doesn't work how I would imagine it works, and probably only goes as far as his healthcare. All that ancillary stuff, wheel chairs, home modifications, and such. I have no idea what the citizen's responsibility is. Donutz, Jed, boarder, and others should be able to chime in a bit about this aspect.

Really, I don't find Burton or the ski area at fault. Kid obviously knew how to board, didn't take the time to get to know what he was riding, and made a horrible decision that he's stuck with for the rest of his life. Calling the family douchebags isn't really fair. It is much easier to deal with if he had of died. A little empathy is ok. If I am on the jury, I'll feel bad for them, but I am not ruling in their favor. Unless someone from Burton or the ski area held a gun to his head and forced him to do this.

And yeah, if he lied about his age, they should just throw the case out. Charging him with a crime? Come on what penalty do you want him to pay? Dude has paid enough, just end the lawsuit phase on this and move on. That way, if they have half a brain, they can do fundraisers and such to help with his expenses. I know when something like this happens stateside, and the families affected take this approach, they usually have pretty god success raising funds in this method. Right now they are alienating the very community that might help dig them out otherwise.


----------



## MarshallV82 (Apr 6, 2011)

killclimbz said:


> Dude has paid enough, just end the lawsuit phase on this and move on. That way, if they have half a brain, they can do fundraisers and such to help with his expenses. I know when something like this happens stateside, and the families affected take this approach, they usually have pretty god success raising funds in this method. Right now they are alienating the very community that might help dig them out otherwise.


This is what I was getting at.. 

The reason I hate these lawsuits is it's just another statistic aiding more retarded nanny laws to protect idiots from their own choices.


----------



## Donutz (May 12, 2010)

Although I personally believe we're less than 10 years away from being able to repair that kind of damage and give him his legs back.


----------



## Donutz (May 12, 2010)

killclimbz said:


> Well if he is a Canadian citizen, he had to be insured. They have universal healthcare. I'm sure it doesn't work how I would imagine it works, and probably only goes as far as his healthcare. All that ancillary stuff, wheel chairs, home modifications, and such. I have no idea what the citizen's responsibility is. Donutz, Jed, boarder, and others should be able to chime in a bit about this aspect.


The Canadian system isn't _that_ good. First, you can be uninsured in Canada. I pay (I think) about $150 a month for family-level medical insurance. If you aren't paying the monthly premium, you aren't insured. A hospital won't put you out on the curb if you aren't insured, but you'll get the minimum treatment and they may sue you for costs afterwards. If you ARE insured, it only covers necessary immediate medical and _some_ therapy. There's also a disability pension, but that's barely enough for groceries. You still face a lifetime of heavy expenses and full-time care. The parents will be responsible for that until he's 19, then they _could_ push him out the door. But he'd be facing a life just one click above homeless.


----------



## Argo (Feb 25, 2010)

I do a lot of spine surgery now with a guy that is really in to research. Our hospital also has one of the more well known private research facilities for sports medicine also. I don't think it is in the near future at all with a complete spinal cord separation. Maybe with partial separations to a minimal extent. 

I do however see in the very near future having "bionic" body parts. There are already some smaller ones out that are freaking amazing. The prosthetic hands they make now are awesome. They move and make the larger muscle functions of a regular hand and do it based on nerve synapses of other muscle groups close to where its mounted on he body. 

A very close friend of mine custom makes prosthetics for BAMC. BAMC is one of the largest military medical facilities in the world that deals with battle field injuries.... The stuff they make is incredible. It just will not actually give back someone's real legs. They can walk but it is through advancements in robotics and there are maybe 3 or 4 that have them and are successful with it. From the nerves I have seen repaired and actually work, which are super small ones in the extremities, it ales about 1 year for every 1mm the nerve has to heel with the latest in nerve "grafts". 

I'm not saying its a "never gonna happen" deal.... Just not very likely to happen in 15 years. One caveat is if the world starts allowing stuff that is not currently allowed through WHO and other organizations that monitor countries and their "morals in health care". Cloning and fresh fetal tissue are a couple things that could actually help with stuff like this but is deemed unethical......


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

Donutz said:


> Although I personally believe we're less than 10 years away from being able to repair that kind of damage and give him his legs back.


That would be awesome, but I have to go with Argo's hypothesis on this. Things have come a long way for sure. Maybe some serious clinical studies by the end of the decade? :dunno:

I do have to say that we are making some serious leaps with technology. A lot of this shit is straight out of sci fi from the 80's and 90's. Something could happen that is a huge jump. You never know.


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

Donutz said:


> The Canadian system isn't _that_ good. First, you can be uninsured in Canada. I pay (I think) about $150 a month for family-level medical insurance. If you aren't paying the monthly premium, you aren't insured. A hospital won't put you out on the curb if you aren't insured, but you'll get the minimum treatment and they may sue you for costs afterwards. If you ARE insured, it only covers necessary immediate medical and _some_ therapy. There's also a disability pension, but that's barely enough for groceries. You still face a lifetime of heavy expenses and full-time care. The parents will be responsible for that until he's 19, then they _could_ push him out the door. But he'd be facing a life just one click above homeless.


Fuck stick. Jesus...


----------



## Argo (Feb 25, 2010)

Damn. I pay about $230 a month for family and its for full coverage medical, $2000 deductible. I pay an extra $15 so that if I'm injured I get 90% pay for 3 months. After that it goes to long term disability which is free through my employer and covers 60% of my current pay for the rest of my life. I also keep a $16 a month personal policy for life and disability that pays out up to $1mil for death and various amounts for different disabilities..... So like $260/month and my family is taken care of. 



Donutz said:


> The Canadian system isn't _that_ good. First, you can be uninsured in Canada. I pay (I think) about $150 a month for family-level medical insurance. If you aren't paying the monthly premium, you aren't insured. A hospital won't put you out on the curb if you aren't insured, but you'll get the minimum treatment and they may sue you for costs afterwards. If you ARE insured, it only covers necessary immediate medical and _some_ therapy. There's also a disability pension, but that's barely enough for groceries. You still face a lifetime of heavy expenses and full-time care. The parents will be responsible for that until he's 19, then they _could_ push him out the door. But he'd be facing a life just one click above homeless.


----------



## ShredLife (Feb 6, 2010)

i did a bunch of research papers in college about stem cell research and stem cell therapy. it is so sad that political bullshit has stopped the US in leading this research but at this point we're waiting on other countries to work it out. 

if we could get funding for embryonic stem cell research beyond the lines that are already out i bet we'd have treatments that would help some partial spinal cord separations by now. they were doing it successfully on lab rats over 6 years ago...

if i was to go back to school it would probably be to become a stem cell scientist nerd.


----------



## Ocho (Mar 13, 2011)

ShredLife said:


> i did a bunch of research papers in college about stem cell research and stem cell therapy. it is so sad that political bullshit has stopped the US in leading this research but at this point we're waiting on other countries to work it out.
> 
> if we could get funding for embryonic stem cell research beyond the lines that are already out i bet we'd have treatments that would help some partial spinal cord separations by now. they were doing it successfully on lab rats over 6 years ago...
> 
> if i was to go back to school it would probably be to become a stem cell scientist nerd.


We use stem cell therapy for horses with much success. The stem cells are taken from a collection of the horse's fat then injected into the injured area. I've personally seen amazing results.

Is this not possible with humans?


----------



## Argo (Feb 25, 2010)

EatRideSleep said:


> We use stem cell therapy for horses with much success. The stem cells are taken from a collection of the horse's fat then injected into the injured area. I've personally seen amazing results.
> 
> Is this not possible with humans?



It is and we do use it in humans currently. Embryo stem cells are the ones in question. They work 1000 times better but they come from a human embryo that is no more rhar a day into growth if i remember right. May ne able to extend to a week. Its a no go from the governments of most countries on moral/ethical grounds 

That whole god and creation thing clouding the foresight of the good it does for people.


----------



## Donutz (May 12, 2010)

One game-changer was posted on physorg a while back. They've developed variations on MRI (IIRC) technology that can actually watch chemical reactions at the subcellular level in real-time (or at least record them). At this point, I believe we can start to figure how _how_ cells do what they do and replicate it. (Yes, I'm a reductionist. Sue me.) Point being that this is a crucial development that's going to put a bend in the curve.


----------



## Ocho (Mar 13, 2011)

Argo said:


> It is and we do use it in humans currently. Embryo stem cells are the ones in question. They work 1000 times better but they come from a human embryo that is no more rhar a day into growth if i remember right. May ne able to extend to a week. Its a no go from the governments of most countries on moral/ethical grounds
> 
> That whole god and creation thing clouding the foresight of the good it does for people.


Ah, thanks. 

Agreed that the moral and ethical clouding is not doing anyone any good. To me, it's a bit like organ donation in the event of one's death. If it can help another (live) person, what is the problem...(rhetorical; not looking to have this thread go in that direction).


----------



## ShredLife (Feb 6, 2010)

with stem cells you've got 'differentiated' cells and 'undifferentiated' cells - differentiated cells have already been "programmed" in a sense to become the type of tissue they are going to become; undifferentiated cells are more of a blank slate and you might be able to use undifferentiated cells of the same stock to make different tissues. (like take a 'pile' of UD stem cells and turn half of them into heart tissue and turn the other half into a cornea or a pancreas or something)

the stem cells the body produces as it ages, to replace naturally dying cells, are called adult stem cells (as opposed to embryonic). you are producing adult stem cells right now in your body in your nose, your bone marrow (blood), skin, etc. 

in the early days of stem cell research most all of the adult stem cells they were harvesting were differentiated cells, and therefore of less use than undifferentiated cells which at the time were pretty much embryonic. now they are finding _undifferentiated adult stem cells_ in i believe bone marrow, maybe in other places... this is a big deal because although there is tons of embryonic tissue out there its too controversial in the US and the govt' won't fund any research on it - but we need undifferentiated cells to repair spinal cords. 

EatRideSleep - as for the horse fat, i imagine if you're able to take those cells and use them to create/heal other types of tissue besides adipose that they're undifferentiated cells.


----------



## ShredLife (Feb 6, 2010)

Donutz said:


> One game-changer was posted on physorg a while back. They've developed variations on MRI (IIRC) technology that can actually watch chemical reactions at the subcellular level in real-time (or at least record them). At this point, I believe we can start to figure how _how_ cells do what they do and replicate it. (Yes, I'm a reductionist. Sue me.) Point being that this is a crucial development that's going to put a bend in the curve.


we already know how many cells do what they do, but neurons are less known for sure... they are usually really slow to regrow if it all and i don't think we really know how one end finds the other when they do..


----------



## Bones (Feb 24, 2008)

killclimbz said:


> Well if he is a Canadian citizen, he had to be insured. They have universal healthcare.


Universal BASIC healthcare. There are tons of things that our system doesn't pay for on the medical side of things let alone things therapy, equipment, drugs, etc. You just won't lose your house because you had to go to emergency.

I think what has allowed the lawsuit to go forward is that the kid is a minor and, by definition, not fully capable of being responsible for his decisions. The waiver has to be agreed to by his legally defined guardian who is, by definition, capable of accepting the risks. Failure by the one party to verify that he is legally capable of assuming the risks nullifies the waiver. The question then becomes: without a waiver, do the inherent risks constitute negligence?

Personally, I think the kid bears some responsibility, but at the end of the day, he's a kid. Maybe he sees a video in the demo area of guys doing big inverted tricks on the very board and the demo guy gives him the "sure Bra, you can do that on this board, give it a try"


----------



## chomps1211 (Mar 30, 2011)

Bones said:


> ....I think what has allowed the lawsuit to go forward is that the kid is a minor and, by _definition_, not fully capable of being responsible for his decisions. _The waiver has to be agreed to by his legally defined guardian who is, by definition, capable of accepting the risks_. Failure by the one party to verify that he is legally capable of assuming the risks nullifies the waiver. The question then becomes: without a waiver, do the inherent risks constitute negligence?


I'm not a lawyer, and not always fond of, nor am I promoting their legalese nit picking,.. but, I would change that statement in regards to both, to read "By legal definition!"

We all know young people who are smart, capable, responsible, individuals, able to make rational thoughtful decisions. And,.. we have all seen parents and adults who are ignorant, irresponsible, stupid moronic fucks who have _NO_ business whatsoever making *any* decisions for themselves let alone minors in their care!

Not sure why I felt the urge to comment on that other than, Aside from in photography, I'm just not fond of Black & White! I tend to see a lot more gray in situations like this! :dunno:


----------



## Bones (Feb 24, 2008)

chomps1211 said:


> ,.. but, I would change that statement in regards to both, to read "By legal definition!"


Agreed.

Actually, I know some capable, responsible 12 year olds who I'd probably trust before some of my 50 year old friends, but you have to draw that legal line somewhere and it has to be black and white.

I just wonder if there's more to this story than is being reported.


----------



## CassMT (Mar 14, 2013)

if it goes all the way to trial i have faith that 12 poeple can sort it out for the bs it is, i just hope burton stick to their guns instead of settling


----------



## Sick-Pow (May 5, 2008)

Kid lied, that shit is bottom line IMO. Sucks he got hurt.


----------

