A skier, who allegedly collided into and killed another skier on Vail Mountain, may have to stand trial on criminal charges of manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide, after the Colorado Supreme Court yesterday granted review of case. The charges were brought by the Eagle County District Attorney against Nathan Hall, after Hall was involved in a collision that killed 33 year old Alan Cobb, on April 20, 1997.

An eyewitness testified that Hall was skiing down the slope at a high speed, directly down the fall line, bumping off of moguls, and back on his skis.

After a preliminary "show cause" hearing, on June 26, 1997 the Eagle County Judge dismissed the charges finding that (Hall's) conduct did not involve a substantial and unjustified risk of death. On appeal to the District Court, 5th District Court Judge, David Lass affirmed Judge Diem's ruling, holding that the prosecution had not established probable cause to find that Hall's conduct created a "substantial and unjustifiable risk of death as opposed to risk of injury."

Following Judge Lass's ruling, the District Attorney Mike Goodbee, and his deputy, Rob Wheeler, filed a Petition for Certiorari to the Colorado Supreme Court, asking that the Supreme Court review the dismissal of the charges.

Wheeler invited Jim Chalat to volunteer as an amicus curiae (friend of the court) and to file a brief supporting the District Attorney's contentions. Chalat Law Offices, P.C., is a Denver law firm with extensive experience and success in handling ski accident cases. Chalat's brief argued that "It is accepted fact that reckless high speed skiing may cause the reckless skier's own death. It is equally reasonable to infer that a skier's reckless high speed skiing can also result in the injury or death of another. The view that substantial injury might be foreseeable but that death is not, amounts to a distinction without a factual basis, in logic or experience." Chalat's brief urged the Supreme Court to take up the case because:

"The implications, of the decision below, are far-reaching and profoundly unsettling for the skiing public. Colorado courts have traditionally been proponents of skier safety. But from the decision below, a bewildering inference is drawn. Does this mean that one's recklessness will result in criminal charges only if the victim is injured, but not killed? Does the state on one hand impose civil liability for negligence, but no criminal culpability for recklessness? The clear and consistent policy of Colorado should be to encourage safe skiing, and to impose appropriate criminal sanctions on the responsible party, when criminal recklessness causes another person's death. "

Regarding the granting of the Petition, Chalat's comments are: "Last ski season was marked by numerous severe skier/skier accidents, and a record number of in-area, skier fatalities. Several skier/skier collisions resulted in severe injury, and one collision resulted in two fatalities. Skier safety is improved when skiers and snow boarders are aware that reckless skiing may result in criminal charges. Because Colorado is the nation's leading ski state, other states will look to the Colorado decision for leadership."