Elaine Sweeney went to Ragged Mountain Ski Resort in New Hampshire with a friend. Elaine went snow

tubing down a run designed exclusively for snow tubers. No Ragged Mountain employees were present

in the snow-tube area to instruct Elaine on the proper use of a snow tube. On her fourth run down the

trail, Elaine crossed over the center line between snow-tube lanes, collided with another snow tuber,

and was injured. Elaine filed a negligence action against Ragged Mountain seeking compensation for

the injuries that she sustained. Two years earlier, the New Hampshire state legislature had enacted a

statute that prohibited a person who participates in the sport of skiing from suing a ski-area operator for

injuries caused by the risks inherent in skiing. Using the information presented in the chapter, answer

the following questions.

1. What defense will Ragged Mountain probably assert?

2. The central question in this case is whether the state statute establishing that skiers assume the

risks inherent in the sport applies to Elaine's suit. What would your decision be on this issue? Why?

3. Suppose that the court concludes that the statute applies only to skiing and not to snow tubing. Will

Elaine's lawsuit be successful? Explain.

4. Now suppose that the jury concludes that Elaine was partly at fault for the accident. Under what

theory might her damages be reduced in proportion to how much her actions contributed to the

accident and her resulting injuries?