Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 4169
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 4169.08 (2026)

Assumption of risk

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
September 26, 2005
Latest Legislation:
Senate Bill 61 - 126th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

(A)(1) The general assembly recognizes that skiing as a recreational sport is hazardous to skiers regardless of all feasible safety measures that can be taken. It further recognizes that a skier expressly assumes the risk of and legal responsibility for injury, death, or loss to person or property that results from the inherent risks of skiing, which include, but are not limited to, injury, death, or loss to person or property caused by changing weather conditions; surface or subsurface snow or ice conditions; hard pack, powder, packed powder, wind pack, corn, crust, slush, cut-up snow, and machine-made snow; bare spots, rocks, trees, stumps, and other forms of forest growth or debris; lift towers or other forms of towers and their components, either above or below the snow surface; variations in steepness or terrain, whether natural or as the result of snowmaking, slope design, freestyle terrain, jumps, catwalks, or other terrain modifications; any other objects and structures, including, but not limited to, passenger tramways and related structures and equipment, competition equipment, utility poles, fences, posts, ski equipment, slalom poles, ropes, out-of-bounds barriers and their supports, signs, ski racks, walls, buildings, and sheds; and plainly marked or otherwise visible snowmaking and snow-grooming equipment, snowmobiles, snow cats, and over-snow vehicles.

(2) Provided that the ski area operator complies with division (B)(4) of this section, no liability shall attach to a ski area operator for injury, death, or loss to person or property suffered by any competitor or freestyler using a freestyle terrain, which injury, death, or loss to person or property is caused by course, venue, or area conditions that visual inspection should have revealed or by collision with a spectator, competition official, ski area personnel, or another competitor or freestyler.

(3) Provided the ski area operator complies with division (B)(5) of this section, no liability shall attach to a ski area operator for injury, death, or loss to person or property suffered by any skier using a tubing park, which injury, death, or loss to person or property is caused by course design or maintenance or conditions that visual inspection should have revealed or by collision with another skier.

(B) The legal responsibilities of a ski area operator to a skier with respect to any injury, death, or loss to person or property resulting in any way from an inherent risk of the sport shall not be those of the common law duty of premises owners to business invitees. A ski area operator shall have, however, the following responsibilities:

(1) To mark all trail maintenance vehicles and to furnish such vehicles with flashing or rotating lights that shall be in operation whenever the vehicles are working or are moving in the ski area;

(2) To mark with a visible sign or other warning implement the location of any hydrant or similar equipment that is used in snowmaking operations and located anywhere in the ski area;

(3) To mark, at the base of a slope or hill where skiers embark on a passenger tramway serving the slope or hill or at the top of a trail or slope, such slopes, trails, and hills with signs indicating their relative degree of difficulty. The signs must be the type that have been approved by the national ski areas association and are in current use by the industry;

(4) Prior to the use of any portion of a freestyle terrain area made available by the ski area operator, to allow each freestyler or competitor a reasonable opportunity to visually inspect the course, venue, or area of the freestyle terrain;

(5) To allow skiers using a tubing park visible access to the course.

(C) A skier shall have the following responsibilities:

(1) To know the range of the skier's ability to negotiate any slope or trail or to use any passenger tramway that is associated with a slope or trail, to ski within the limits of the skier's ability, to ski only on designated slopes and trails, to maintain control of speed and course at all times while skiing, to heed all posted warnings, and to not cross the track of a passenger tramway except at a designated area;

(2) To refrain from acting in a manner that may cause or contribute to the injury of another person, to refrain from causing collision with any person or object while skiing, and to not place any object in a ski area that may cause another skier or a passenger to fall;

(3) When involved in a skiing accident in which another person is involved who needs medical or other assistance, to obtain assistance for the person, to notify the proper authorities, and to not depart from the scene of the accident without leaving personal identification;

(4) If the skier is a competitor, freestyler, or user of freestyle terrain, to assume the risk of all course, venue, or area conditions, including, but not limited to, weather and snow conditions; obstacles; course or feature location, construction, or layout; freestyle terrain configuration and conditions; and other courses, layouts, or configurations of the area to be used;

(5) If the skier is utilizing a tubing park, to assume the risk of collision with others on the course.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1990–2012 · leading case: Horvath v. Ish, 2012-Ohio-5333, 979 N.E.2d 1246.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Horvath v. Ish, 2012-Ohio-5333, 979 N.E.2d 1246. · cites it 64× “We hold that skiers assume the ordinary risks of skiing, which include collisions with other skiers, and cannot recover for an injury unless it can be shown that the other skier’s actions were reckless or intentional. {¶ 2} The court of appeals reversed the trial court’s grant…”
Horvath v. Ish, 2011-Ohio-2239, 954 N.E.2d 196. · cites it 52× “The Ishes counter that the statute does not impose duties between skiers; rather, the duties described in R.C. 4169.08 are owed by a skier to a ski-area operator.”
Stone v. Alpine Valley Ski Area, 734 N.E.2d 888 (Ohio Ct. App. 11th Dist. 1999). · cites it 16× “Appellants also argued that R.C. 4169.08 does not absolve appellee of common premises liability and does not provide immunity to a ski resort when its conduct gives rise to circumstances where there is great probability of harm.”
Shaheen v. Boston Mills Ski Resort, Inc., 619 N.E.2d 1037 (Ohio Ct. App. 9th Dist. 1992). · cites it 7× “The court based its opinion on R.C. 4169.08, which states in pertinent part: “(C) * * * [A] skier shall have the following responsibilities: “(1) To know the range of his ability to negotiate any slope or trail or to use any passenger tramway that is associated with a slope or…”
Lopez v. Ski Apache Resort, 836 P.2d 648 (N.M. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2× “1989) (skier expressly assumes risk of injury from lift towers); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 4169.08 (Anderson Repl.”
Otterbacher v. Brandywine Ski Ctr., Inc., 3 Ohio App. Unrep. 256 (Ohio Ct. App. 9th Dist. 1990). · cites it 15× “08, express and implied assumption of the risk, and an express anticipatory release" Brandywine asserts that R.C. 4169.08 bars Otterbacher's action. R.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 4169.08(A): 3 cases
Horvath v. Ish, 2012-Ohio-5333, 979 N.E.2d 1246. “We hold that skiers assume the ordinary risks of skiing, which include collisions with other skiers, and cannot recover for an injury unless it can be shown that the other skier’s actions were reckless or intentional. {¶ 2} The court of appeals reversed the trial court’s grant…”
Horvath v. Ish, 2011-Ohio-2239, 954 N.E.2d 196. “The Ishes counter that the statute does not impose duties between skiers; rather, the duties described in R.C. 4169.08 are owed by a skier to a ski-area operator.”
Stone v. Alpine Valley Ski Area, 734 N.E.2d 888 (Ohio Ct. App. 11th Dist. 1999). “Appellants also argued that R.C. 4169.08 does not absolve appellee of common premises liability and does not provide immunity to a ski resort when its conduct gives rise to circumstances where there is great probability of harm.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 4169.08(A)(1): 2 cases
Horvath v. Ish, 2012-Ohio-5333, 979 N.E.2d 1246. “We hold that skiers assume the ordinary risks of skiing, which include collisions with other skiers, and cannot recover for an injury unless it can be shown that the other skier’s actions were reckless or intentional. {¶ 2} The court of appeals reversed the trial court’s grant…”
Horvath v. Ish, 2011-Ohio-2239, 954 N.E.2d 196. “The Ishes counter that the statute does not impose duties between skiers; rather, the duties described in R.C. 4169.08 are owed by a skier to a ski-area operator.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 4169.08(A)(2): 2 cases
Horvath v. Ish, 2012-Ohio-5333, 979 N.E.2d 1246. “We hold that skiers assume the ordinary risks of skiing, which include collisions with other skiers, and cannot recover for an injury unless it can be shown that the other skier’s actions were reckless or intentional. {¶ 2} The court of appeals reversed the trial court’s grant…”
Horvath v. Ish, 2011-Ohio-2239, 954 N.E.2d 196. “The Ishes counter that the statute does not impose duties between skiers; rather, the duties described in R.C. 4169.08 are owed by a skier to a ski-area operator.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 4169.08(B): 2 cases
Horvath v. Ish, 2012-Ohio-5333, 979 N.E.2d 1246. “We hold that skiers assume the ordinary risks of skiing, which include collisions with other skiers, and cannot recover for an injury unless it can be shown that the other skier’s actions were reckless or intentional. {¶ 2} The court of appeals reversed the trial court’s grant…”
Horvath v. Ish, 2011-Ohio-2239, 954 N.E.2d 196. “The Ishes counter that the statute does not impose duties between skiers; rather, the duties described in R.C. 4169.08 are owed by a skier to a ski-area operator.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 4169.08(B)(1): 1 case
Horvath v. Ish, 2012-Ohio-5333, 979 N.E.2d 1246. “We hold that skiers assume the ordinary risks of skiing, which include collisions with other skiers, and cannot recover for an injury unless it can be shown that the other skier’s actions were reckless or intentional. {¶ 2} The court of appeals reversed the trial court’s grant…”
Ohio Rev. Code § 4169.08(C): 2 cases
Horvath v. Ish, 2012-Ohio-5333, 979 N.E.2d 1246. “We hold that skiers assume the ordinary risks of skiing, which include collisions with other skiers, and cannot recover for an injury unless it can be shown that the other skier’s actions were reckless or intentional. {¶ 2} The court of appeals reversed the trial court’s grant…”
Horvath v. Ish, 2011-Ohio-2239, 954 N.E.2d 196. “The Ishes counter that the statute does not impose duties between skiers; rather, the duties described in R.C. 4169.08 are owed by a skier to a ski-area operator.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 4169.08(C)(1): 3 cases
Horvath v. Ish, 2012-Ohio-5333, 979 N.E.2d 1246. “We hold that skiers assume the ordinary risks of skiing, which include collisions with other skiers, and cannot recover for an injury unless it can be shown that the other skier’s actions were reckless or intentional. {¶ 2} The court of appeals reversed the trial court’s grant…”
Horvath v. Ish, 2011-Ohio-2239, 954 N.E.2d 196. “The Ishes counter that the statute does not impose duties between skiers; rather, the duties described in R.C. 4169.08 are owed by a skier to a ski-area operator.”
Shaheen v. Boston Mills Ski Resort, Inc., 619 N.E.2d 1037 (Ohio Ct. App. 9th Dist. 1992). “The court based its opinion on R.C. 4169.08, which states in pertinent part: “(C) * * * [A] skier shall have the following responsibilities: “(1) To know the range of his ability to negotiate any slope or trail or to use any passenger tramway that is associated with a slope or…”
Ohio Rev. Code § 4169.08(C)(2): 2 cases
Horvath v. Ish, 2012-Ohio-5333, 979 N.E.2d 1246. “We hold that skiers assume the ordinary risks of skiing, which include collisions with other skiers, and cannot recover for an injury unless it can be shown that the other skier’s actions were reckless or intentional. {¶ 2} The court of appeals reversed the trial court’s grant…”
Shaheen v. Boston Mills Ski Resort, Inc., 619 N.E.2d 1037 (Ohio Ct. App. 9th Dist. 1992). “The court based its opinion on R.C. 4169.08, which states in pertinent part: “(C) * * * [A] skier shall have the following responsibilities: “(1) To know the range of his ability to negotiate any slope or trail or to use any passenger tramway that is associated with a slope or…”
Ohio Rev. Code § 4169.08(C)(3): 1 case
Horvath v. Ish, 2012-Ohio-5333, 979 N.E.2d 1246. “We hold that skiers assume the ordinary risks of skiing, which include collisions with other skiers, and cannot recover for an injury unless it can be shown that the other skier’s actions were reckless or intentional. {¶ 2} The court of appeals reversed the trial court’s grant…”
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.