The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P was skiing an expert trail with his friends. During his second run down the slope, P skied through a plume of snow projected from a snowmaking machine. The artificial snow froze on his goggles, blinding him and causing him to lose control. He ran off the trail and struck a tree, where he sustained severe injuries that left him quadriplegic. P sued D and alleged that D had been negligent in the placement and operation of its snowmaking machines. D raised the affirmative defense of assumption of risk, arguing that the West Virginia Skiing Responsibility Act placed the burden of care on P. D offered evidence that P had been skiing too fast, too close to the edge of the trail, and in a manner beyond his ability. The jury returned a verdict for D. It found that D had not been negligent in its maintenance of the ski trail. P appealed. P claims that the jury instructions did not include specific instructions related to P’s claims.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.