Industry News
Skiing and snowboarding are deeply rooted in Idaho’s culture and economy, with the state’s Ski Area Liability Law historically offering legal clarity on the risks of the sport. The law acknowledges that skiing carries inherent risks, such as collisions with trees or sudden changes in snow conditions, and generally limits a resort’s liability unless clear negligence is proven. Skiers are expected to take responsibility for their actions, while resorts must uphold safety protocols like signage and lift operation.
Earlier this year, the case of Milus v. Sun Valley Company threatened to upend that long-standing legal framework. After a tragic 2019 incident where a skier died after hitting a snowmaking tower at Sun Valley, in 2023, the Idaho Supreme Court reversed a lower court ruling that had sided with the resort, stating that a jury should decide if the resort was partially liable. This shift in legal interpretation could have far-reaching consequences, such as drastically increasing liability insurance costs for ski resorts, particularly for smaller, locally owned operations that can’t absorb those added expenses.
Now, the Idaho Supreme Court has reversed a key part of its controversial 2023 decision that had shaken the state’s ski industry and caused national concern. In a unanimous ruling, the court reaffirmed that the widow of the skier who died in the 2019 crash at Sun Valley Resort could not proceed with her lawsuit, citing that the snowmaking tower involved was clearly visible and marked. This reinstates the lower court’s original dismissal of the case under Idaho’s Ski Area Liability Act, which has protected ski areas from certain types of legal action since 1979.
However, the court did not completely return to prior interpretations of the law. With one justice opposed, the majority maintained a change in how ski resort duties are to be evaluated under the law. Instead of shielding resorts entirely from being judged on how they fulfill their safety responsibilities, the court introduced the idea of a “standard of care” for assessing certain resort actions which potentially opens the door for more lawsuits. While the ruling is considered a win for the ski resorts, this shift has left ski area operators uncertain, prompting concerns about future liability and insurance costs.
While some think the law is clear and should be applied as written, others pointed to this case showing some ambiguity. Legislative leaders had previously held off on revising the law until the court ruled. Now that the ruling is final, lawmakers say it’s time to reconsider the statute to clarify its intent and make it easier for courts and the public to understand how it should apply.
The potential fallout echoes what happened in Vermont after a similar court decision in the 1970s, which caused liability premiums to soar and forced many small ski areas to shut down. Idaho ski resort operators are concerned that history could repeat itself if their liability protections are rolled back. Without those safeguards, the cost of skiing could rise dramatically, or worse, beloved small-town hills might disappear altogether, reducing local access to winter recreation and altering the state’s ski landscape for years to come.
All this is happening as the neighboring state of Oregon’s outdoor recreation industry is facing a major crisis as a key insurer, Safehold Special Risk, has exited the state due to an unfavorable legal environment that makes liability waivers difficult to enforce. With only one insurer remaining, rising costs and limited options threaten the viability of these operations, especially smaller, family-owned resorts. To try to resolve this problem, Senate Bill 1196, which was introduced in March 2025, aims to address the issue by making waivers more enforceable for cases involving ordinary negligence. However, while it has gained some support, it remains contentious among lawmakers, and time is running out to pass meaningful reform before the legislative session ends.
Lawmakers in Idaho, including House Judiciary Committee Chair Rep. Bruce Skaug, have expressed interest in revisiting the law during the 2026 legislative session to clarify its intent and possibly reinforce ski resort protections. Industry leaders, like Bogus Basin’s general manager Brad Wilson, welcomed the ruling’s outcome but remain cautious about its broader legal implications. The resort plans to consult legal experts to fully understand the decision’s potential effects.
As Idaho ski areas navigate the legal uncertainty left in the wake of the Milus v. Sun Valley case, the need for legislative clarity has become increasingly urgent. The Supreme Court’s ruling brought some relief, but its introduction of a new legal standard has complicated what was once a clear-cut liability framework. With parallels to Oregon’s unfolding insurance crisis and echoes of Vermont’s past, Idaho’s ski industry is at a crossroads. Lawmakers and resort operators must now work together to ensure that legal protections are balanced, preserving both public safety and the economic viability of ski areas.
