Grajeda v. Vail Resorts Inc. Et Al

Parties Involved

Verdict Information

  • Verdict date: February 16, 2024
  • Total damages awarded to Plaintiff: $0.00

About the Case


Okemo Mountain Resort, also known as Okemo Resort, is a public recreational ski and sports resort situated at 77 Okemo Ridge Road, Ludlow, Vermont. Vail Resorts owns OKEMO RESORT.On December 19, 2019, Plaintiff Richard Grajeda was skiing at Okemo Resort when he fell on the beginner’s trail known as “Open Slope.” The trail had numerous snowmaking guns positioned along it. Around 10:00 A.M., Grajeda fell and slid into one of these guns, which was inadequately padded, leaving exposed metal that his body struck. The Defendants, Vail Resorts, Vail Management, and Okemo Limited, were allegedly aware of these conditions.

Plaintiff sued the Defendants by initiating a personal injury action against them. Plaintiff claimed that Defendants’ negligence solely caused his injuries. Their failure to properly pad the snowmaking gun exacerbated the severity of his injuries beyond what they would have been with adequate safety measures in place. Grajeda claimed that he did not contribute to the incident in any way. His injuries were not a result of the inherent risks of skiing, and he did not anticipate or agree to assume the risk of encountering improperly maintained ski trails.


Due to the Defendants’ negligence, Richard Grajeda suffered severe and permanent injuries. These included a catastrophic spinal cord injury that left him paraplegic. He endured significant physical and mental pain, as well as psychological anguish. Additionally, he incurred substantial medical expenses and would continue to do so in the future.


As a result of these events, Richard Grajeda suffered damages totaling $50,000,000. Therefore, he requested a judgment against the Defendants for $50,000,000, plus all associated costs of the present legal action.

Jury Verdict

On February 16, 2024, the Vermont jury found that Plaintiff had not been injured as a result of the “obvious and necessary” danger inherent in the sport of skiing as defined by the Vermont Sports Injury Statute. However, the jury also found that Plaintiff had failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence each essential element of his negligence claim against the Defendants.

Therefore, the jury delivered the verdict in favor of the Defendants and Plaintiff was not entitled to recover any damages.

Court Documents:

Available upon request