Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Horvath v. Ish

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided November 20, 2012No. 2011-1089Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partPfeifer, J.

{¶ 23} I concur in the majority’s judgment affirming the appellate court’s decision to reverse the trial court’s granting of summary judgment. However, I do not agree with the majority’s baffling interpretation of R.C. 4169.08 and 4169.09. I also do not agree that there is no common-law duty of care between skiers. If legal issues were ski slopes, the one raised in this case would be a bunny hill. Somehow, the majority has careened down the hill and wound up smashed through the wall of the lodge.

A Skier’s Statutory Duties

{¶ 24} The fact that R.C. Chapter 4169 tends to limit the liability of…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Chambers v. St. Mary's SchoolOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Swoboda v. BrownOhio Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Jaworski v. KiernanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
  4. Sikora v. WenzelOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Sunday v. Stratton Corp.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1978

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API