The general assembly hereby finds and declares
that it is in the interest of the state of Colorado to establish reasonable safety standards for the
operation of ski areas and for the skiers using them. Realizing the dangers that inhere in the sport
of skiing, regardless of any and all reasonable safety measures that can be employed, the purpose
of this article 44 is to supplement the passenger tramway safety provisions of article 150 of title
12; to further define the legal responsibilities of ski area operators and their agents and
employees; to define the responsibilities of skiers using such ski areas; and to define the rights
and liabilities existing between the skier and the ski area operator and between skiers.
Source: L. 79: Entire article added, p. 1237, § 1, effective July 1. L. 2019: Entire section
amended, (HB 19-1172), ch. 136, p. 1720, § 222, effective October 1.
Editor's note: The act amending provisions of this article included a nonstatutory
legislative declaration in section 1 of chapter 256 (SB 90-80), Session Laws of Colorado 1990,
that the Colorado Supreme Court considered in deciding Stamp v. Vail, 172 P.3d 437 (Colo.
2007), annotated under § 33-44-113.
Cross references: For the nonstatutory legislative declaration in SB 90-80, which
amended several sections in this article 44, see section 1 of chapter 256, Session Laws of
Colorado 1990.
Notes of Decisions
Graven v. Vail Assocs., Inc., 909 P.2d 514 (Colo. 1996).
· cites it 6× “§ 33-44-102, 14 C.R.S. (1995). As originally enacted, the Ski Safety Act identified several specific duties owed to ski patrons by ski area operators, §§ 33-44-106 to -108, 14 C.”
Bayer v. Crested Butte Mountain Resort, Inc., 960 P.2d 70 (Colo. 1998).
· cites it 6× “See § 33-44-102, 9 C.R.S. (1997). In 1990 amendments to the Ski Safety Act, the legislature limited the liability of ski area operators for accidents on the slopes involving the "inherent dangers and risks of skiing.”
Pizza v. Wolf Creek Ski Dev. Corp., 711 P.2d 671 (Colo. 1985).
· cites it 2× “While we agree that there are certain risks inherent in the sport of skiing, see section 33-44-102, and ski area operators possess expertise in operating ski areas, we do not think the risks associated with skiing rise to the level of those associated with supplying electricity,…”
People v. Hall, 999 P.2d 207 (Colo. 2000).
“See also § 33-44-102 (recognizing “the dangers that inhere in the sport of skiing”).”
Lopez v. Ski Apache Resort, 836 P.2d 648 (N.M. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 2× “Most ski legislation attempts to divide areas of responsibility and liability between the ski area operator and the skier, recognizing that there are risks inherent in the sport for which the skier must remain solely responsible, and making an effort to prevent the ski area…”
Fleury v. Intrawest Winter Park Operations Corp., 411 P.3d 81 (Colo. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 5× “§ 33-44-102. The Act's stated purposes are to "define the legal responsibilities of ski area operators and their agents and employees; to define the responsibilities of skiers using such ski areas; and to define the rights and liabilities existing between the skier and the ski…”
Anderson v. Vail Corp., 251 P.3d 1125 (Colo. Ct. App. 2010).
“§ 33-44-102, C.R.$.2010. The Act then provides the duties of both ski area operators and skiers.”
v. Clear Creek Skiing Corp., 2020 COA 176 (Colo. Ct. App. 2021).
“” § 33-44-102, C.R.S. 2020. 22 ¶ 40 In 1990, the General Assembly amended the SSA to limit the liability of ski area operators by providing that “no skier may make any claim against or recover from any ski area operator for injury resulting from any of the inherent dangers and…”
Giebink v. Fischer, 709 F. Supp. 1012 (D. Colo. 1989).
· cites it 2× “The only responsibilities imposed upon operators by the Ski Safety Act relate to posting signs, §§ 33-44-106, 33-44-107, and providing lighting and other conspicuous markings for snow-grooming vehicles and snowmobiles. C.R.S. § 33-44-108. “A violation by a ski area operator of…”
Fleury v. IntraWest Winter Park Operations Corp, 2016 CO 41 (Colo. 2016).
· cites it 10× “§ 33-44-102, C.R.S. (2015). It therefore provides that “no skier may make any claim against or recover from any ski area operator for injury resulting from any of the inherent dangers and risks of skiing.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.