For anyone who skis or rides in Colorado, buying a season pass is routine — a quick online checkout before the first snowfall. But a recent decision from the Colorado Supreme Court is a reminder that the fine print in that checkout process can carry serious legal weight, even for claims that have nothing to do with the upcoming season.
In Litterer v. Vail Summit Resorts Inc., the court ruled 4-3 that a snowboarder gave up his right to pursue an already-pending injury lawsuit against a ski resort when he agreed to a liability waiver while purchasing an Epic Pass online. The decision has drawn attention across the state's ski industry, and it's worth understanding if you or someone you love spends time on Colorado's slopes.
What Happened in the Case
John Litterer was injured in December 2020 when he collided with a snowmobile operated by an employee at Breckenridge Ski Resort, which is owned by Vail Summit Resorts. He sued the company and the employee, raising claims of negligence, negligence per se, and extreme and outrageous conduct.
While that lawsuit was still active, Litterer went online to purchase a season pass for the 2022-23 ski season. As part of the checkout process, he electronically agreed to a waiver releasing all claims against the resort and its employees — including claims arising from anything that had already happened, whether or not he was aware of them at the time.
Litterer argued that he never intended for the waiver to release his existing lawsuit. The Colorado Supreme Court's majority disagreed, finding that his subjective intent didn't matter. What mattered, the court said, was his objective conduct: he signed a waiver that warned him in large capital letters that he was releasing his right to sue, then purchased and used the pass. Under Colorado law, he couldn't avoid those terms by later claiming he hadn't read or understood them.
Why the Court Treated This as a Post-Injury Release
A key issue in the case was timing. Colorado law treats waivers signed before an injury occurs differently than releases signed after an injury has already happened — pre-injury waivers get closer scrutiny, especially when it comes to statutory safety violations at ski resorts.
The court's 2024 decision in Miller v. Crested Butte LLC had already established that ski resorts cannot use pre-injury waivers to escape liability for certain statutory safety violations. But the majority in Litterer's case held that this protection didn't apply here, because his season pass waiver was signed well after his injury and functioned as a post-injury release of an existing, known dispute — not an advance waiver of future, unknown risks.
The court also upheld dismissal of Litterer's claims for willful and wanton conduct and punitive damages, explaining that willful and wanton conduct isn't a standalone claim under Colorado law — it's a standard used to evaluate punitive damages, which require an underlying successful claim to attach to. Since all of Litterer's claims were released, there was nothing left to support a punitive damages request.
A Sharp Dissent
Three justices dissented, warning that the majority's reasoning gives ski resorts a way to extract broad releases of pending lawsuits by burying that language inside lengthy, legalese-heavy online agreements that most pass buyers would never recognize as giving up an active injury claim. The dissent argued the waiver should have been reviewed under the stricter pre-injury standard and struck down as against public policy.
Justice Richard L. Gabriel put it bluntly in his dissent: "Today will undoubtedly be a day of celebration for Colorado's ski industry."
What This Means for Colorado Skiers and Riders
This decision is a good reason to slow down at that online checkout screen, especially if you have any kind of pending claim — or even a recent injury you haven't yet looked into — involving a resort. A few practical takeaways:
- Read what you're agreeing to, even during a routine purchase. Season pass and lift ticket waivers are written to cover far more than the upcoming season. Under this ruling, clicking "I agree" can affect claims that already exist, not just future risks.
- Timing matters. How a waiver is treated under Colorado law can depend heavily on whether it was signed before or after an injury occurred. If you have an open claim against a resort, purchasing a new pass or ticket before that claim is resolved could have consequences you didn't intend.
- "I didn't read it" isn't a defense. Colorado courts look at what you objectively agreed to and how you acted afterward — not what you privately intended or whether you actually read the terms.
- This area of ski liability law is still developing. The distinction between pre-injury and post-injury waivers, and how far resorts can go in using online agreements to close out claims, remains a contested and evolving area of Colorado law.
Injured at a Colorado Ski Resort?
If you've been hurt at a Colorado resort and are dealing with an insurance company, a resort's legal team, or an online waiver you're not sure you should sign, it's worth talking to an attorney before you take any further action — including renewing a pass or ticket. Our Colorado office, based in Snowmass Village, works with clients throughout the state's mountain communities on ski and resort injury claims, and we handle cases on a contingency fee basis, so you pay nothing unless we win.
Have questions about a ski or resort injury claim? Call (512) 430-4844 today for a free consultation.
This case is Litterer v. Vail Summit Resorts Inc., case number 25SC134, in the Colorado Supreme Court. Reporting on the underlying decision via Law360.