supposedly offered is on aware of the terms and conditions of that agreement and i'm referring to the national federation for the blind against the container sorties since no son if he cannot establish that mr miller was aware of the liability release those printed on the lift ticket  testify that he was aware that there was a contract on the take it or of the peel off backing because with the specs of stops on provision he was specifically asked up to your son to be seen career and the day of this accident your testimony is you were never aware that language on li just head is on this issue of knowing this was their notice of the contract if it was if it was instructive on notice that there was a contract whether you looked at it or not is neither here nor there that's exactly correct so as i understand the pre reynolds is potentially the best case for you but potentially not that good for us at all we just talk about rentals and there are there's a lift ticket like this i take it in the reynolds was the release on the face hurdle you have to get through is how you can say there was no notice of the release when the ticket printed phase side ups as it has a release right so dealing with in new hampshire was suggests to me that the mere fact that t icket says on the front of it here is the release is not enough to put you on notice that you are being asked to release your rights right as a matter of law in new hampshire law says that is not enough expression when you have a situation where the assent is manifested by peeling off the back of the ticket what case is that that is on the tube or else the reynolds says that is not enough they said that that was a question for the jury to determine whether or not a reasonable person would have known of the existence ticket didn't give you enough notice it doesn't matter what's on the back yes that's correct and we put a quote in our required brief stage shows just that that we argued that the let's take it itself look at the back yes and to that point we used an expert affidavit from stephen b roll cox ph d was a human factors expert and he went through a list of ten features of this list to take it including the features on the front of the ticket that would make it so client was able to or saw the liability release or the circumstances surrounding that why isn't that a matter for a jury i believe that a man if i may answer the question i believe that a minimum it is a matter for a jury the evidence in this case does not establish that he was aware of the liability release on the must take it so at that point you can't rely on his subjective mindset you have to look to what a reasonable person in his position had been really had on this issue is certainly no deposition testimony we have an affidavit from the operations manager of mt sunapee which we believe shows that mounts on it he was aware that there were metal pipes which are the older  making equipment that were buried underneath the snow and they said particularly in snowy winters such as the one when this accident happened the snow holder and the pipe would become covered with snow so in light of that awareness and really the only ones that are aware of where these pipes are located on the mountains we believe that a minimum to failure to do that in light of the fact that they knew or potentially new discovered constitutes a disregard for the life and safety of others that would be skiing issue of whether he had time to read it if he was aware of it but there's a threshold question of was he aware of the sorry and he must have been because as you've alluded to it was h possibility is the face of the ticket to blank you just a blank piece of paper turns or if you turn on the back and you pull something off there be a stop sign it one might wonder gee would i know that when i peeled off the back i was manifesting itself to release when the front of the ticket was awareness that there are these metal pipes on this slopes and there's an awareness that when it snows really heavily the period covered and is the record presents itself there's no indication that any notice was given to is what it would have looked like when it was handed to him but all of this other larger more attention grabbing text printed above the liability release which is printed upside down and sized point three white font at the bottom of the take it this  score with a comment that was made in cullen and to the extent that you could even find that some features of this liability release were printed in a conspicuous manner and cullinane dischord said everything on the screen is written with conspicuous