Personal Injury Law

Salomon Recalls Ski Bindings Due to Unexpected Release, Fall Hazard ? Would Be Liable Notwithstanding Skier?s Waiver or Release

With the onslaught of cold weather and the forecast for snow, one feels the urge to hit the ski slopes. One of the most trustworthy names in ski bindings for many, many years is Salomon. But last month the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with Salomon, announced a voluntary recall of about 10,000 alpine ski bindings and directed consumers to stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed. The manufacturer has received two reports of injuries, including a broken leg and a knee injury.

The hazard is that the toe component of the ski bindings could fail to fully secure the ski boot to the ski binding, causing the binding to release unexpectedly. This could cause the skier to lose control or fall and suffer injuries.

The recall involves the Salomon alpine ski bindings with models LZ 7, LZ 8, LZ 9, LZ 7 SR, LZ 8 SR, LZ 8 SC, and J LZ 9 and the Atomic ski bindings with model Evox 2.8, Evox 2.8+, Evox 2.8++, and FFG 8. ?Salomon? or ?Atomic? and the respective model number are displayed on the ski bindings. The toe components bear a production date code ending in ?8? that can be found on the center plate where the toe of a ski boot contacts the toe component of the bindings.

Many people when they purchase, lease or rent ski equipment are asked to sign a waiver of liability. While this waiver might apply to the risks known and inherent in the sport, such a waiver will not release a manufacturer from liability for its own negligence. Skiers often do not realize that in New York these waivers do not apply to hazards that go beyond those hazards normally associated with the sport. A defectively manufactured or designed ski binding would not be considered a risk assumed by a skier.

People should not think that having signed these waivers, or observing signs such as those posted at ice skating rinks that say ?Skate [Ski] at your own risk?, means that they have acquiesced to accept being injured no matter the cause. People may too often be discouraged from pursuing a lawsuit against a skating facility, pool, gymnasium or other place of amusement or recreation to which they have paid a fee to enter. New York State General Obligations Law §5-326 renders certain exculpatory clauses unenforceable.

General Obligations Law § 18-103 sets forth the duties of ski area operators in New York. Violations of the requirements of this statute can be used at trial against a ski area operator.

The personal injury lawyers at Levine & Slavit have decades of experience handling personal injury claims. For 50 years spanning 3 generations, we have obtained results for satisfied clients. Contact the personal injury lawyers at Levine & Slavit for their help. We have offices in Manhattan and Long Island, handling cases in New York City, the Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens and surrounding areas.

To learn more, watch our videos.

Full post as published by Legal Blog on December 18, 2009 (boomark / email).