Squires v. Breckenridge Outdoor Education Center, 715 F.3d 867

Plaintiff Kimberly Squires, legally blind with cerebral palsy and cognitive delays, was injured in a ski accident at Breckenridge while participating in a BOEC program through Camp Fire USA (diversity suit against Breckenridge Outdoor Education Center).
Prior to the trip, BOEC sent a Letter and an Acknowledgment of Risk & Release of Liability to Camp Fire USA, which was circulated to the participants’ parents, including Mrs. Squires.
Mrs. Squires signed the Release on January 13, 2008, acknowledging risk and releasing BOEC from any claims “whether resulting from negligence or otherwise.”
Plaintiff was paired with a BOEC instructor on a bi-ski; on the second run of the first day, a collision caused Plaintiff to be propelled into trees, injuring her.
The magistrate judge granted summary judgment for Defendant on the negligence claim, concluding the Release was enforceable; the gross negligence claim proceeded to a jury, which returned a verdict for Defendant.
On appeal, Plaintiff challenges the Release’s enforceability under Colorado law, arguing exculpatory invalidity, lack of voluntary and informed consent under § 13-22-107, and fraudulent inducement; the court affirms the judgment for Defendant on the negligence claim.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Validity under Jones four-factor test	Squires argues the fourth Jones factor requires detailed activity-specific risks; Release is ambiguous.	Release clearly extinguishes liability for negligence; language is unambiguous and broad.	Release is valid under Jones; language unambiguous and intent to release liability is clear.
Informed/voluntary consent under § 13-22-107	Mrs. Squires did not understand adaptive skiing risks and bi-ski specifics, so consent was not voluntary or informed.	Consents meet § 13-22-107(1)(a)(V) with information provided and mother’s general knowledge of risks; informed.	Consent satisfied § 13-22-107(1)(a)(V); determination based on language, information provided, and mother’s knowledge.
Fraudulent inducement	Letter contained misrepresentations about accreditation and standards, which induced signing.	No evidence Squires relied on misrepresentations; other statements lacked falsity or reliance; no fraud proven.	Plaintiff failed to prove fraudulent inducement; defense to fraud upheld against release.

Heil Valley Ranch, Inc. v. Simkin, 784 P.2d 781 (Colo. 1989) (exculpatory agreements disfavored but not void per se; four-factor Jones test)
Jones v. Dressel, 623 P.2d 370 (Colo. 1981) (four-factor test for exculpatory agreements)
Forman v. Brown, 944 P.2d 559 (Colo. App. 1996) (exculpatory validity not limited to specific activity description)
Wycoff v. Grace Cmty. Church of the Assemblies of God, 251 P.3d 1260 (Colo. App. 2010) (informing parental consent assessed with extrinsic information)
Hamill v. Cheley Colo. Camps, Inc., 262 P.3d 945 (Colo. App. 2011) (parental consent informed when risks and activities are known; consideration of provided information)
Cooper v. Aspen Skiing Co., 48 P.3d 1229 (Colo. 2002) (public policy on parental waivers for child claims; statutory override)