Clover v. Snowbird Ski Resort
808 P.2d 1037 · Utah Supreme Court · 1991
Facts
Plaintiff Margaret Clover was severely injured when Snowbird employee Chris Zulliger collided with her while skiing. Zulliger, a chef, was instructed to inspect another restaurant on the mountain before his shift, for which he received a ski pass. After completing the inspection, Zulliger skied several more runs and took a known dangerous jump, colliding with Clover who was below the crest.
Issue
Did the trial court err in granting summary judgment to Snowbird by finding that Zulliger was not within the scope of employment, that the Inherent Risk of Skiing Statute barred negligent design claims, and that Snowbird had no duty to supervise employees acting outside the scope of employment?
Holding
The court reversed and remanded the case for further proceedings, finding that genuine issues of material fact existed for all claims. It held that whether Zulliger was within the scope of employment was a question for the jury, that the skiing statute does not bar negligence claims for non-inherent risks, and that employers can be directly liable for negligent supervision regardless of respondeat superior.
Rule
An employee's conduct is within the scope of employment if it is the general kind of work, occurs within employment boundaries, and is motivated by serving the employer, with personal detours not always constituting abandonment. The Inherent Risk of Skiing Statute protects operators only from risks integral to skiing that cannot be eliminated by ordinary care, not from their own negligence. Employers have a direct duty to supervise employees to prevent foreseeable harm, irrespective of whether the employee's actions are within the scope of employment.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener
Case brief last reviewed . Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.