Paul and Beatrice Metz took their 11 year-old daughter Orristine on a weekend sking trip; they stayed at the St. Stratton ski resort. The St Stratton awned and maintained four sko trails and a ski lift on its property. One morning Mr. and Mrs. Metz were faving coffee in the skl lodge while their daughter was niding the sko lift to the top of the mountain, On the way up, the car containing Christine Metz and one other vier jumped off its cable guide and plunged 300 feet down the mountain. As a result of the fall, Christine was permanently paralyzed from the neck down. The Metrs filed a Inwut against the resort Their attorney discavered that the car's connectoos to the cable were checked oncre a year by a mainsenance staf person unfamilar wht the intricacies of ski cable cars. The munufacturer of the cable car recommended weeidy inspections, performed by a specially trained service techrician The sod resorts corporace owners maintained that all skiers assumed risk when sking that the manufacturers recommendation was simply a recommendation, and thac their own inspection program demonstrated they had indeed exercised reasonable care, in additon, they maintained thas Christine's paralysis was the result of an unfortungte accidert for wi cable cars manufacturet, not the retort should be held responsible. Discuss whether the resort should exercise reasonable care, and what ievel of negligence, if any, was present? Ordinary negligence? Gross negligence