Bicycle Safety Tips in 2023

Written By: Chris Dolan and Allison Stone

This week’s question comes from Andie in San Francisco, who asks: Spring is upon us, and more and more of us ride our bicycles outside. What are some simple tips for riding our bicycles safely?

Andie,

“Bicycle Safety Month” and “Bike To Workday” are both in May so it is a great time to review some of the safety tips. While bicycling is a great means of transportation and exercise, it can also be quite dangerous if cyclist don’t take certain precautions. Unfortunately, collisions between cyclists and motorists are common and often result in serious personal injuries.

According to the DMV, over 100 bicyclists are killed, and over 10,000 are injured yearly in California collisions. Bicyclists have the same responsibilities as motorists. It is important to remember the following safety tips every time you ride a bike:

ALWAYS WEAR A HELMET WHILE BICYCLING

The basic law in California is that: bicyclists aged 18 and older riding on a street, bikeway, or any other public bicycle path, sidewalk, or trail are not required to wear a bicycle helmet while riding a bike, while bicyclists under the age 18 riding on the street, bikeway, or any other public bicycle path, sidewalk, or trail are required to wear an approved, properly fitted and fastened bicycle helmet, both while operating a bicycle and while riding as a passenger, including a restraining seat attached to a bicycle or in a trailer towed by a bicycle. California Vehicle Code Section 21212(a).

In other words, for adult bicyclists, no law requires using a helmet, but for those under 18, helmet use is mandatory except while bike riding on private property.

Nevertheless, we strongly recommend that minors and adults wear bike helmets in every situation. Helmets can reduce the risk of head and neck injury in a bicycle versus auto collisions.

It is also essential to know and understand that although adults are not required to wear a helmet in California if injured in an accident while riding without a helmet, even where the other person or driver is at fault, the lack of a helmet is likely to be an issue in your case and the other driver will argue that you should are responsible for all or at least a portion of your injuries due to your failure to wear a helmet.

Remember, helmets have an expiration date. They can degrade over time, so be sure to replace them when it is time for a new one. Consider replacing the helmet in a collision, even if you do not see damage.

ALWAYS USE LIGHTS, REFLECTORS & BRIGHT CLOTHING

One of the most important tips for bike riders is that you want to be noticeable to drivers. Bikes are significantly smaller than cars and, therefore, inherently far less evident to drivers.

Using lights and reflectors at night is the law. Lighting includes but is not limited to a front lamp emitting a white light visible from 300 feet in front and the sides of the bicycle and a rear red reflector or a solid or flashing red light with a built-in reflector visible from 500 feet. Be sure to refer to California Vehicle Code Section 21201 which sets forth the specific requirements for all the reflectors and lights required on the bike.

Further, the California Vehicle Code sets forth a minimum requirement. You always want to do whatever you can to make yourself more visible.

A bright front headlight paired with a blinking taillight enhances visibility, particularly if you commute on your bike. Reflective tape and stickers for your bike and helmet are also a good idea to make you more conspicuous.

Additionally, wearing bright clothing such as orange and yellow helps drivers see you from farther distances and especially in busy areas, at night, and in bad weather (dawn, dusk, gloom, or fog). Avoid wearing dark clothing when it is dark outside.

MISCELLANEOUS TIPS FOR BIKE RIDING SAFELY

First and foremost, always obey traffic laws, including signaling, obeying traffic lights and signs, and do not jump or attempt to beat a red light. Riding predictably and lawfully allows other drivers to predict your behavior and avoid a collision due to conduct that is out of the ordinary or unexpected.

As with driving an automobile, always be alert and aware of your surroundings and the conditions around you. Do your best to assess potential impediments, obstructions, and other negligent drivers on the road. Many accidents occur at junctions and intersections, so take extra steps, such as making eye contact with the other drivers on the road, to ensure you are seen in these areas, including crossings. Be sure to look over your shoulder before turning or changing lanes. Also, use your bell to warn other bicyclists and pedestrians of your presence. Never assume others see you.

Try to ride a door’s width from parked cars to avoid a car door opening in your path and hitting you.

Remember to remain distraction-free—do not text or look down at your phone. Avoid riding and wearing headphones to ensure you can hear everything around you. You do not want to be doing anything or listening to anything which may prevent you from seeing or hearing your surroundings.

Always keep both hands on the handlebars.

Do not consume alcohol when riding a bike.

Ensure your bike is in good, roadworthy condition, including maintaining the brakes and tires. Before riding, always check to make sure the brakes, lights, bell, and reflectors are working properly.

Auto versus bicycle collisions can have severe consequences for bicyclists. Keep these tips in mind to stay safe.

May is National Bike Month/Bicycle Safety Month and our Bicycle Accident Personal Injury lawyers want to remind all cyclists to ride safely and avoid any serious bicycle crash injuries. We encourage bicyclists to follow traffic laws, use proper hand signals, be aware of their surroundings and, most importantly, wear a helmet. The Dolan Law Firm is also giving away up to $200 cash towards a new helmet of your choice to promote safety awareness for bicyclists. If you would like to sign up for the giveaway, click here.

—

We have sponsored local bicycle groups for many years, including the California Bike Coalition, the Bay Area’s biggest Bicycle event with San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, Bike East Bay and the Marin County Bicycle Coalition. This annual event is celebrated by thousands of people who choose to leave their motorized vehicles at home and participate in a healthier alternative to get to work, school, and other activities.

On Bike to Work Day 2023 (BTWD 2023), energizer stations will be set up throughout the Bay Area, supporting early morning cyclists with free swag and safety tips on bicycling in urban areas.

Before you head out and bike, we want to make sure you ride safely. Click here to download our free Bay Area Bike and Safety Law Guide to celebrate the biggest day for bicycles.

Written By Chris Dolan and Eric St. John

This week’s question comes from Barry from San Francisco, who writes: Hello, I live in San Francisco, and it is starting to warm up. Whenever summer comes around, fireworks go off in my area. I was wondering, are fireworks legal in the Bay Area?

Dear Barry,

Thank you for writing in with your comments and questions. The simple answer is that fireworks are illegal in California and the Bay Area. There can be both criminal and civil penalties for possessing them or setting them off, especially if someone or something gets damaged in the process.

Digging into firework laws a bit more, we learn that in California, there are two categories of fireworks recognized by the law: “dangerous fireworks” and “safe and sane fireworks.”

Dangerous fireworks shoot, explode, move along the ground, or are moderate in size. These types of fireworks include Roman candles and firecrackers. Dangerous fireworks are always illegal in the Bay Area and all of California. The only exception is for licensed pyrotechnic operators who receive formal approval to put on a firework display, typically around holidays like the Fourth of July.

Safe and sane fireworks, such as small sparklers or snap caps, are small and do not explode, move, or fly. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection puts out a complete list of safe fireworks. Only licensed retailers can sell safe and sane fireworks, from June 28th to July 6th each year.

Firework laws in the Bay Area vary from county to county, but, in essence, all types of fireworks are illegal in all counties in the Bay Area. It is always illegal to give any fireworks, even safe and sane, to anyone under the age of 16. Solano and Sonoma County have an exception for safe and sane fireworks around the Fourth of July only.

There can be criminal and civil trouble for using fireworks, especially if someone gets hurt.

Criminally, violating firework laws carry penalties of up to 1 year in county jail and a fine of up to $1,000. These criminal penalties can increase to a felony offense if someone is in possession of a large quantity of dangerous fireworks or uses them in an unsafe manner. A felony firework offense can result in up to 3 years in State prison and fines of up to $50,000. Various other charges tend to attach to firework cases, including dangerous or reckless burning, disturbing the peace, and even arson.

Civilly, if fireworks harm someone, they may have legal recourse through a personal injury lawsuit. This would involve making a claim that someone else’s negligence or intentional conduct using fireworks caused injuries.

So why are fireworks illegal, and what is this fuss about? Well, for many people, fireworks are a fun toy to play with. The reality is that fireworks are explosive, flammable, hazardous, and can cause life-altering injuries, even death. All it takes is one lapse of judgment to end up with lost appendages or an uncontrollable fire.

According to the National Fire Protection Association, in 2019, U.S. emergency rooms treated over 10,000 individuals for fireworks related injuries. The injuries included burns to all parts of the body, lost fingers, loss of eyesight, hearing loss, shrapnel wounds, concussions, and death in the worst of incidents. The vast majority of these injuries occurred in the summer season.

Take sparklers, for example. Sparklers are typically seen as “safe” fireworks that children are given to wave around to see the sparks dance. But sparklers can burn up to 1800 degrees Fahrenheit and cause thousands of burn injuries each year.

Beyond the physical damage they can cause, fireworks cause an average of 18,500 reported fires yearly, resulting in an average of $43 million in direct property damage. Californians must take the risk of wildfires seriously. The summer heat and use of fireworks do not mix well for wildfires and the use of fireworks should be avoided.

Although fireworks are illegal, the reality is that regardless of the law, people are going to be out and about using fireworks, especially around the Fourth of July. Our goal here at Dolan Law Firm is to prevent injuries and reduce the harm in our world. But we must acknowledge that people will violate the law and still engage in dangerous behaviors. So, here are some things to watch out for if you are around fireworks:

Pyrotechnic experts will put on firework shows, it is safer to watch a professional set off fireworks rather than do it yourself.
Never point fireworks at someone else, even if unlit; you should not place any trust in the explosive in your hand.
Fireworks should never be modified or attempted to be modified. Any modification can cause a sudden combustion and is unpredictable. Modifying fireworks has resulted in extreme injuries and death.
Even safe and sane fireworks, where legal, should only be used in an outdoor environment, away from trees, brush, buildings, and other flammable materials. Keep a bucket of water and a hose nearby in case of a fire or accident.
If you are going to dispose of fireworks, soak them in water before placing them in any trash bin. If they are dangerous or illegal fireworks, call the authorities and allow them to dispose of them.

Above all else, be safe out there. Setting off fireworks may be perceived as a fun and joyous activity, but the reality is that fireworks are dangerous, and one mishap can result in life-changing injuries.

In San Francisco, you can call 311 to report the unsafe use of fireworks. If there is an immediate threat of injury or property damage, you can call 911 directly.

Last month, Attorneys Chris Dolan and Megan Irish published an article highlighting the concerning frequency of cars crashing into convenience stores. These storefront crashes are a known risk to stores and they can prevent them by installing bollards. This week, Christopher B. Dolan had the opportunity to discuss a case (Sisemore v. 7-Eleven) along with Robert Reiter, founder of Storefront Safety Council, highlighting the importance of storefront safety and how bollards can be extremely effective in preventing injuries or even death at convenience stores.

See the exclusive interview with Inside Edition here:

About The Case (Sisemore v. 7-Eleven):

On approximately May 31, 2019, Ms. Sisemore made a routine stop to get gas at a 7-Eleven station. The machine card reader at the pump would not read her card so she went in to pay. Unaware of what was going to happen, while she was paying for gas at the counter, a car crashed through the door and hit her while she was inside the 7-Eleven.

Written By Christopher Dolan and Cioffi Remmer

This week’s question comes from Robert in Oakland, CA, who asks: How will AI and the ChatGPT app impact the practice of personal injury law?

Dear Robert,

The public’s interest in Artificial Intelligence has surged recently with the introduction of “ChatGPT,” OpenAI’s Artificial Intelligence application. On ChatGPT, you can prompt the AI program to write essays, articles, speeches, book reports, answer questions, and even write software code. To answer your question, I asked ChatGPT to write an article on AI’s impact on practicing personal injury law in the next five, ten, and 20 years. Here’s what ChatGPT wrote:

“Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming various industries, and the legal industry is no exception. AI-powered applications like ChatGPT have the potential to revolutionize the practice of personal injury law in the coming years. In this article, we will explore the impact of AI on personal injury law over the next five, ten, and 20 years.

Personal injury law involves cases in which a person is injured due to the negligence of another party. Such cases can be complex and time-consuming, requiring extensive research and analysis of legal precedents and statutes. This is where AI-powered applications like ChatGPT can be particularly useful.

In the next five years, AI-powered legal research tools will become increasingly common. These tools can quickly and accurately analyze large volumes of legal data, including court opinions, statutes, and regulations. This will allow lawyers to conduct legal research more efficiently and effectively, saving time and money for their clients.

Furthermore, AI-powered applications can assist lawyers in predicting case outcomes and settlement values. By analyzing data from past cases and considering various factors, AI algorithms can provide insights into the potential outcomes of a case. This can help lawyers to make better-informed decisions and advise their clients accordingly.

In the next ten years, we can expect to see AI-powered applications being used to streamline the litigation process. For example, AI algorithms can analyze medical records and other evidence to help lawyers build stronger cases. This can reduce the need for expensive expert witnesses and simplify the discovery process.

Moreover, AI-powered applications can assist lawyers in drafting legal documents, such as pleadings and motions. These applications can analyze past cases and legal precedents to generate documents that are tailored to the specific needs of a particular case. This can save lawyers a significant amount of time and improve the quality of their work.

In the next 20 years, AI-powered applications may even be able to assist with settlement negotiations and courtroom arguments. For example, AI algorithms could analyze the personalities and behavior of judges and opposing counsel to predict their responses to certain arguments. This could help lawyers to craft more persuasive arguments and negotiate more favorable settlements for their clients.

However, as with any technological advancement, there are also potential drawbacks to the increasing use of AI in personal injury law. One concern is the potential for bias in AI algorithms. If these algorithms are trained on biased data, they may perpetuate existing inequalities and injustices in the legal system. Moreover, the use of AI may raise ethical concerns around the role of lawyers and the potential de-skilling of certain legal tasks.

In conclusion, AI-powered applications like ChatGPT have the potential to significantly impact the practice of personal injury law in the coming years. While there are potential risks and challenges associated with the increasing use of AI in the legal industry, there are also significant benefits to be gained. As AI continues to evolve, we can expect to see even more innovative applications being developed to assist lawyers in their work.”

Written By Chris Dolan and Nicolette Rae Bencito

This week’s question comes from Frederic from San Francisco, CA who asks: My neighbors and I last had power for three days! We rely on PG&E, but they are still making repairs to the power pole that was damaged in the recent storms. What is a reasonable time for them to fix the problem? Can my neighbors and I seek compensation?

Dear Frederic,

Thank you for your question. It can be incredibly frustrating to be without power for this long, and we hope PG&E can make the necessary repairs soon. PG&E can generally be held responsible for damages that result from their serious misconduct or “gross negligence.” Suppose any person, business, or property is damaged because PG&E does something unreasonable or fails to do something they should have been done. In that case, PG&E must reimburse the injured party for reasonable damages.

However, holding PG&E liable for any damages resulting from forces beyond their control would be difficult. These forces include power outages or voltage fluctuations caused by weather conditions like lightning, floods, heavy storms, extreme heat, and strong winds. While it would be challenging to hold PG&E liable for the initial outages that occurred due to the storm, PG&E is responsible for making repairs as soon as it is safe. Any unreasonable delays to making the necessary repairs to restore power could be considered “gross negligence” that would cause PG&E to face impending legal action from the city or other injured parties.

If you are experiencing an outage due to severe storm conditions, you may be eligible for automatic payments through PG&E’s Safety Net Program. The PG&E Safety Net Program compensates residential customers who lose power for at least 48 due to severe storm conditions. This program makes payments in increments of $25, based on the length of a customer’s outage:

48-72 hours: $25
72-96 hours: $50
96-120 hours: $75
120 hours or more: $100

Payments are generally issued 45 to 60 days following the storm outage.

If you experience an outage for any other reason, you may be eligible for compensation under PG&E’s Service Guarantees. According to PG&E’s Service Guarantee #7:

“PG&E will restore electric service within 24 hours, unless the cause is absolutely beyond our control, or we will automatically credit your account $30 for each 24-hour period you are without service.”

It is important to note that compensation under the Service Guarantees does not apply when planned service interruptions, serious emergencies, or storm conditions cause outages.

Additionally, if you experience any other losses that you believe PG&E may have caused, you can always file a claim for reimbursement. You can file a claim against PG&E in three ways:

through PG&E’s claims service,
through your insurance, or
through court action.

To submit a claim for compensation through PG&E directly, you can process your claim on an online form through PG&E’s Claims. Filing online is typically the fastest way to process a claim through PG&E, but you can also file through email, fax, or U.S. Mail. The following list serves as a guideline for photos and documentation that may be helpful to support your claim:

For Property Damage: Detailed repair estimates and invoices or purchase records.
For Personal Injury: Copy of medical records and receipts.
For Lost Wages: The amount of time you could not work due to personal injury, verification of lost time from your employer, and payroll stubs showing your hourly or daily pay rate.
For Lost Revenues: Tax records and bank statements, payroll records, revenue and expense statements, and sales receipts.
For Miscellaneous Losses: Hotel, restaurant, and car rental receipts.
For Food Spoilage: An itemized list of the costs and type of spoiled perishable food, with receipts or other documentation.

If you choose to file a claim through your own insurance company, your insurer may be able to reimburse you for your losses without an investigation. Your insurer may even pay you the replacement value for damaged items. Each insurance company has its own claims process, so contact your insurer for more information.

If you file a claim through PG&E or your insurance company, you still reserve the option to file a court action at any time during the claims process, even if PG&E or your insurance company deny your initial claim. If the value of your claim does not exceed $10,000, you can file a small claims action that does not require an attorney. Whether or not you pursue this route, we recommend seeking legal advice and working with an experienced personal injury lawyer to resolve the issue.

Written By Chris Dolan and Nancy Villatoro

This week’s question comes from Calvin from Hayward, CA, who asks: News reports have talked about defective eye drops, and they mentioned that the FDA had recalled many eye drop brands. Can you discuss why this is happening and what people can do if they are injured by them?

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and state and local health departments are investigating a multistate outbreak of an extensively drug-resistant strain of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. According to the CDC, this bacterial outbreak has been associated with multiple eye infections nationwide. So far, this bacterial outbreak has affected 68 patients in 16 states, including patients in California. Thus far, the most severe cases include three deaths, eight people experiencing vision loss, and four undergoing enucleation, surgical eyeball removal.

Most patients affected by this bacterium have reported using artificial tears, more commonly known as eye drops. The FDA has issued a recall on three eye drop brands. The FDA and the CDC recommend that people stop using the products they have recalled. Some side effects to be vigilant for include:

Yellow, green, or clear discharge from the eye
Eye pain or discomfort
Redness of the eye or eyelid
Feeling of something in your eye (foreign body sensation
Increased sensitivity to light
Blurry vision

Use the following websites to determine if your product has been recalled: FDA.gov, CPSC.gov, Recalls.gov, NHTSA.gov, FSIS.USDA.gov, and Foodsafety.gov. If you believe you have purchased and used an unsafe or mislabeled product, you may report the product to FoodSafety.gov.

If you or a loved one have sustained an injury due to eye drops, you may be entitled to compensation under a claim of products liability. However, thoroughly understanding the legal components and requirements involving a defective product and presenting a solid case is crucial.

To build a solid products liability claim, you must ultimately do the following:

Show the product was defective.
Prove liability.
Prove that the defective or dangerous product resulted in your personal injury.

Types of Product Defects

Products liability claims generally fall into three categories:

Design Defect. A design defect claim argues that a product’s design is inherently dangerous or defective. This claim does not suggest that an error occurred during the manufacturing process of a product but that an entire line of products is dangerous or bound to be defective, as all products in a certain line utilize the same design. Some design defect examples include a vehicle tire that blows out at certain speeds or a clothes dryer that becomes too hot and starts a fire. In California, two tests are used to determine liability: the risk/benefit test, and the consumer expectations test.

Manufacturing Defect. A manufacturing defect claim arises when a product becomes flawed due to an error in manufacturing, which is then unlike the standard, other items of the product line, and subsequently causes injury. Therefore, although the product line’s design is safe, the manufacturing of a particular product varied from the specifications, resulting in a malfunction. An example is when a seatbelt is accidentally left out of a vehicle during manufacturing or a product becomes contaminated while it is being sealed.

Lack of Adequate Warnings or Instructions. This claim results from a product failing to provide enough instructions regarding proper usage or warnings. An example is when a medication lacks warnings about specific drug interactions or lists possible side effects.

Proving Liability

To prove liability in a defective product claim, you need to prove that the product was being used as intended, the product was defective, you were injured or suffered harm, and that harm was caused due to the defect. For this, evidence is key.

Evidence includes the defective product, photos and videos documenting the injuries, the defect, or even the incident, medical bills, accident reports, witness statements, insurance documents, emails, marketing materials, or memos showing the manufacturer knew of the defect.

Possible Defenses

In California, a manufacturer may have defenses to defend against fault. First, the product was misused or modified in a way that was not reasonably foreseeable, and that misuse or modification was the sole cause of the injuries. Second, the user is a “sophisticated user,” meaning that because of experience, knowledge, or skill, the user knew or should have known that the product was dangerous.

Damages

The compensation you may receive in a product liability case varies depending on the misconduct’s type, severity, and ramifications. Specifically, in claims involving products, generally, the damages have to be primarily due to the costs of the litigation. Furthermore, it is important that if you are the victim of a defective, unsafe, or dangerous product, you keep the product to prove it was the one that caused your loss.

Written By Christopher B. Dolan

If You’re in the Stands, Keep Your Eye on the Ball: Over the past decade, at the beginning of baseball season, I have published a column concerning who is responsible if someone gets hit with a line drive, foul ball and/or broken bat while watching a game. As a lawyer, and a big Giants fan, I like to start off the season by saying, put down your cell phone and keep your eye on the ball during play. A distraction can lead to serious and even life threatening injury.

Balls and bats leaving the playing field and entering the stands are not uncommon. In a 2014, Bloomberg News analysis of ballpark injuries, it was reported that each year in the United States roughly 1,750 spectators are injured by batted balls at major league ballparks. The study showed spectators were much more likely to be hit with an errant ball than a player was to be hit with a pitch. While most injuries are thankfully minor, there are reports of severe injuries, and even death, due the sport’s use of wooden bats and 90 mph plus fastballs.

In an article published in the Boston Globe by Catherine Cloutier on June 09, 2015, Edwin Comber, a baseball statistician, is quoted as saying that about 73% of foul balls go into the stands. A 2000 lawsuit against the Red Sox revealed that during a five-year period in the 90’s, 36 to 53 fans per year were hit by balls outside the field of play. Furthermore, there have been reports of skull fractures and even brain injuries, as a result of bats and balls entering the stands. As the fans demand to be ever closer to the action, and the field is filled with high-priced seats closer and closer to the plate and baselines, the risk of injury goes up just as fast as the price.

The issue of liability for fans’ injuries was addressed by the California Supreme Court in 1935 in the case of Quinn v. Recreation Park Ass’n, 3 Cal.2d 725, where the court held that one of the natural risks assumed by fans attending major league games is that of being struck by batted or thrown balls. The Court ruled that the franchise and/or park owner/operator is not required, nor does it undertake, to insure patrons against injury from such source. All that is required is the exercise of ordinary care to protect patrons against such injuries. Management is not obliged to make each seat safe from flying balls. The court pointed out that many patrons prefer to sit where their view is not obscured by a screen.

The duty imposed by law is performed when screened seats are provided for as many as may be reasonably expected to call for them on any ordinary occasion and if a spectator chooses to occupy an unscreened seat or is unable to buy a screened seat and chooses to occupy one that is not protected, they, “assume the risk of being struck by thrown or batted balls; and, if injured thereby, is precluded from recovering damages therefor,” as stated in Brown v. San Francisco Ball Club.

In Neinstein v Los Angeles Dodgers Inc. (1985) 185 Cal.App.3d 176, the Court of Appeals held that:

…The quality of a spectator’s experience in witnessing a baseball game depends on his or her proximity to the field of play and the clarity of the view, not to mention the price of the ticket. As we see it, to permit plaintiff to recover under the circumstances here would force baseball stadium owners to do one of two things: place all spectator areas behind a protective screen thereby reducing the quality of everyone’s view, and since players are often able to reach into the spectator area to catch foul balls, changing the very nature of the game itself; or continue the status quo and increase the price of tickets to cover the cost of compensating injured persons with the attendant result that persons of meager means might be priced out of enjoying the great American pastime. To us, neither alternative is acceptable…

Despite the Court’s unwillingness to intervene to reshape baseball through tort law, I am happy to report that all thirty teams in the MLB have decided to extend safety netting and screening all the way down the first and third baselines to the foul pole. So, if you are in the lower section, you should be better protected from line drives and broken batts. If you are in the upper decks, keep your eye on the ball because, if you are in an unprotected seat, you are legally assuming the risk of injury.

Written By Chris Dolan and Jeremy Jessup

This week’s question comes from Jayson from Redwood City, CA who asks: With all the heavy rain and snow we have experienced in California, the ski resorts will be open into the summer months and potentially see a record number of attendees. Given that so many people will converge on these resorts, especially after school lets out, what duties do they have to ensure that everyone is safe from a serious ski accident?

Dear Jayson,

This is an excellent question. Ski resorts in California are a popular destination for winter sports enthusiasts. With the increasing popularity of skiing and snowboarding, the legal liabilities of ski resorts in California have become a significant concern for resort operators and visitors alike. However, there are a few ways that a ski resort can avoid liabilities in California due to skiing accidents.

Negligence

The most basic claim against ski resorts is an injury caused by their negligence. Negligence is the most common legal theory under which ski resorts may be held liable for injuries sustained by skiers. Negligence occurs when a ski resort fails to exercise reasonable care, resulting in injury or harm to a skier. In California, ski resorts owe a duty of care to skiers who use their facilities. This duty requires ski resorts to maintain their premises in a reasonably safe, inspect it for hazards, warn skiers of potential risks, and take reasonable steps to prevent accidents. If a ski resort breaches this duty of care and a skier injures themself due to their negligence, the resort may be held liable for damages.

A liability waiver is a legal document that releases the ski resort from liability for injuries sustained by skiers. However, to avoid liability under a negligence claim, most ski resorts have you waive your rights to assert a claim for their negligence. This waiver process usually occurs when you purchase your lift ticket. In California, liability waivers are generally enforceable, provided they are clear, conspicuous, and specific. Liability waivers are not absolute protections for ski resorts. If a skier injures themself due to the ski resort’s gross negligence, a liability waiver may not be enforceable, and the resort may still be held liable for damages.

Gross Negligence

Gross negligence is a legal concept that applies in California and other states to hold individuals or organizations liable for their extreme or reckless conduct that leads to harm or injury to others. Under California law, gross negligence is a higher degree of negligence than ordinary negligence, a failure to exercise reasonable care. Under California law, gross negligence is “the want of even scant care or an extreme departure from the ordinary standard of conduct.” This means that a ski resort’s conduct must be significantly more egregious than mere negligence to be considered gross negligence. A finding of gross negligence can have significant legal consequences. For example, if a ski resort is found to have acted with gross negligence in maintaining its facilities, it may be subject to the unenforceability of its liability waiver.

It is important to note that the standard for proving gross negligence is high, and not all reckless or dangerous conduct will rise to the level of gross negligence.

Assumption of the Risk

California courts have long held that skiing is an inherently dangerous activity. By purchasing a lift ticket and skiing at a resort, a rider impliedly and expressly assumes the risks of the sport. Assumption of risk is another legal theory that limits ski resort liability. In California, riders assume the inherent risks of skiing and snowboarding, such as falling, colliding with other skiers, and encountering natural hazards like rocks and trees. However, ski resorts can still be liable for all injuries sustained by skiers. If a skier is injured due to a hazard that is not inherent to the sport of skiing or due to the ski resort’s gross negligence, the resort may be held liable despite the skier’s assumption of risk.

Assumption of the risk by the skier or rider does not absolve the ski resort from liability; ski resorts may be held liable where they create or increase the risk of unsafe, atypical conditions (i.e., gross negligence). In addition, ski resorts in California must also comply with state and federal laws governing the operation of ski resorts. For example, ski resorts must maintain safe skiing conditions, post warning signs, and develop and implement safety plans. Additionally, ski resorts must comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which requires that ski resorts make reasonable accommodations for individuals with disabilities.

In addition to the legal liabilities discussed above, ski resorts in California may also face liability for accidents involving ski lifts and other equipment. Resorts must inspect and maintain ski lifts to ensure their safety. They may be held liable for injuries sustained by skiers due to a malfunctioning or poorly maintained ski lift. Ski resorts must also ensure that the equipment they rent, such as skis and snowboards, are safe for use by skiers.

To limit their legal liability, ski resorts in California should take steps to ensure they maintain their facilities in reasonably safe condition. They should train their employees to operate ski lifts and other equipment properly and adequately inspect and maintain them. Also, take steps such as identifying and addressing hazards, posting warning signs, and developing and implementing safety plans.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recalled three eye drop brand linked to serious vision loss, death and serious infections. See list of brands that they are recommending you stop using: Brands to Stop Using.

For additional recalls see FDA List.

At the Dolan Law Firm, our personal injury lawyers fight for our clients. We have the experience and resources to get results in your case. Contact our office to schedule a free evaluation of your case.

Bicycle Safety Tips in 2023

Written By: Chris Dolan and Allison Stone

ALWAYS USE LIGHTS, REFLECTORS & BRIGHT CLOTHING

Celebrating National Bike Month and Bicycle Safety Month 2023