Title: Spencer v. Killington, Ltd.

State: vermont

Issuer: Vermont Supreme Court

Document:

Spencer v. Killington, Ltd  (95-327); 167 Vt. 137; 702 A.2d 35

[Opinion Filed 18-Sep-1997]

[Motion for Reargument Denied as Untimely Filed 23-Apr-1997]

[Motion for Reargument Denied 18-Sep-1997]

                          ENTRY ORDER

                 SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 95-327

                         APRIL TERM, 1997

Samuel Spencer                        }     APPEALED FROM:
                                      }
                                      }
     v.                               }     Chittenden Superior Court
                                      }
Killington, Ltd., Killington Ski      }
Club and Steven Miller                }     DOCKET NO. S368-92CNC

                          On Motion for Reargument

       Killington Ltd. and Steven Miller (hereinafter Killington) contend
  that the above-titled case should be reargued and remanded for development
  of a full factual record because this Court (1) mistakenly assumed that the
  "Ski Bum" race series was open to the general public, and (2) overlooked
  the fact that Killington did not charge either plaintiff or the Killington
  Ski Club for providing the site and assistance that made the race series
  possible.  According to Killington, a full exploration of these facts is
  necessary because they are material to the "totality of the circumstances"
  and "societal expectations" regarding the enforceability of the release.

       Two members of the Court would grant the motion for reargument, even
  though Killington merely restates arguments and facts considered and
  rejected in the Court's opinion. In its supplemental brief and at oral
  argument before we decided this case, Killington argued that the summary
  judgment record was insufficient for this Court to determine that Dalury v.
  S.K.I. Ltd., 164 Vt. 329,