What to Know About the Sun Valley Wrongful Death Case Going Before the Idaho Supreme Court

In February 2025, the Idaho Supreme Court heard a pivotal wrongful death appeal involving a Sun Valley ski accident that originally occurred in November 2019. The plaintiff, Laura Milus, filed suit after her husband, Chris Milus, was fatally injured in a high-speed collision with another skier at Sun Valley Resort. Her ongoing legal battle raises profound questions about personal responsibility, ski resort liability, and how Idaho law interprets the phrase “visible or plainly visible” in recreational negligence claims.

This wrongful death lawsuit is more than just a tragic accident on the slopes. It has become a statewide legal debate that could redefine how civil courts apply Idaho’s recreational immunity laws, especially when someone dies in what appears to be a preventable collision. For families across Boise and the greater Wood River Valley, the case underscores how difficult it can be to hold individuals or organizations accountable in the aftermath of catastrophic injury or death.

As experienced Boise wrongful death attorneys, we at Montgomery Dowdle have been closely tracking the progression of this case. We believe it highlights why grieving families need skilled legal counsel, especially when their path to justice involves complex statutory interpretations and powerful defense arguments.

If your family is facing a wrongful death or serious injury caused by negligence on the road, at a business, or on a recreational property, contact our team today at (208) 378-8882 or submit your case online. We’ll help you explore your legal options and fight for the accountability your family deserves.

Details About the Fatal Ski Collision at Sun Valley Resort

The tragic skiing accident that sparked the current Idaho Supreme Court case happened in November 2019 at Sun Valley Resort, one of the most popular ski destinations in the state. Chris Milus, a skilled and experienced skier, was navigating a run near the Flying Squirrel trail when another skier collided with him from behind. The impact caused catastrophic injuries that ultimately proved fatal. Now, more than five years later, his widow, Laura Milus, is fighting to hold the other skier legally accountable for what she believes was a negligent and preventable crash.

The case centers not only on the facts of the collision but also on Idaho’s interpretation of what hazards are considered “inherent” in recreational skiing and whether a reckless skier can escape legal responsibility under the guise of assumption of risk.

The Location of the Crash at Sun Valley

According to statements from the plaintiff and legal filings, the incident took place on the Flying Squirrel run, a moderately steep groomed trail that merges into other downhill traffic areas. Sun Valley Resort, located near Ketchum in Blaine County, offers more than 2,000 acres of skiable terrain. The resort is known for its open slopes, interconnecting trails, and high-speed lifts.

You can view the resort’s trail layout on the official Sun Valley Resort trail map to see where the Flying Squirrel trail intersects with other runs. This area, while not considered expert terrain, is often busy with intermediate and advanced skiers, increasing the risk of high-speed encounters.

The crash reportedly occurred mid-mountain, in an area with clear visibility and open slope design. These conditions are now at the heart of the legal argument: whether the downhill skier who struck Chris Milus failed to maintain a proper lookout or follow basic skier safety principles.

The Identity and Role of the Other Skier

While the identity of the defendant has not been widely released in news reports, legal filings describe the skier as someone who was traveling at a high rate of speed. According to court documents, the individual failed to see or avoid Chris Milus before crashing into him from behind, a clear violation of the well-established rules of skier conduct, which require that downhill skiers yield to those ahead.

The Idaho Supreme Court is now reviewing whether the trial court should have allowed the case to proceed or whether the collision falls under Idaho’s recreational immunity statutes. Central to the case is the legal meaning of “visible or plainly visible”, a standard set forth under Idaho’s liability protections for outdoor recreational activities.

What We Know From the Original Lawsuit

Laura Milus filed her wrongful death suit in 2021, alleging that the defendant skier behaved recklessly and with disregard for the safety of others. Her legal team argued that the accident was not an “inherent risk” of skiing, but rather the result of individual negligence. However, the district court dismissed the case, citing Idaho’s recreational immunity law, which shields landowners and individuals from liability for injuries caused by risks “inherent in the sport.”

Now, in 2025, the Idaho Supreme Court is taking a second look. The plaintiff returned to the court on February 14, 2025, to argue that if her husband had been “plainly visible,” as evidence suggests, then the immunity law should not apply, and the lower court ruling should be reversed.

More information on the ongoing legal proceedings is available through Idaho News, which originally reported on the February 2025 hearing.

Understanding Skier Responsibility Under Idaho Law

Skiers in Idaho must follow the Idaho Skier Safety Act (Idaho Code § 6-1101 et seq.), which outlines the duties and responsibilities of individuals on the slopes. This includes maintaining control, yielding to those ahead, and avoiding reckless conduct. A comprehensive explanation of Idaho ski law can be found on the Idaho State Legislature’s website.

If the Supreme Court ultimately rules in favor of Laura Milus, the decision could redefine how Idaho applies these safety laws in future recreational injury or death claims, especially in cases where one skier’s actions violate established norms of safety.

How Idaho Law May Shape the Outcome of This Sun Valley Wrongful Death Case

As the Sun Valley wrongful death case moves through Idaho’s highest court, the outcome may have far-reaching implications not just for Laura Milus and her family but for anyone seeking justice in the wake of a recreational injury or fatality. At the core of the legal dispute is a question that could redefine immunity protections in Idaho: When is a skier collision considered a risk “inherent” to the sport, and when does it cross the line into actionable negligence?

To answer that question, the Idaho Supreme Court must closely examine several layers of civil law, including the state’s recreational use immunity statute, principles of wrongful death liability, and a central dispute over the interpretation of “visible or plainly visible.” Each of these legal issues has sparked debate among attorneys, judges, and ski safety experts statewide.

Idaho’s Recreational Use Immunity Law and the Meaning of Assumed Risk

Under Idaho Code § 36-1604, private landowners and recreational operators, such as ski resorts, enjoy substantial legal protection against lawsuits arising from injuries that occur on their property. This protection is known as “recreational use immunity,” and it shields those who open their land for outdoor use like skiing, hiking, or snowmobiling from liability, provided they do not charge a fee or behave recklessly.

The policy behind this immunity is simple: Idaho wants to encourage open access to recreational land. However, when private entities operate large, commercial resorts and charge for admission, as Sun Valley Resort does, this legal shield can become murkier.

The official Idaho State Legislature page on recreational use law provides the full statutory language, which includes terms like “inherent risk” and “obvious or necessary dangers.” The defense in the Milus case argues that skiing collisions, even fatal ones, are part of these inherent risks and thus, the court should dismiss the claim.

But Laura Milus and her attorneys contend that this particular collision was not part of the sport’s natural danger. They argue the other skier violated basic safety rules and struck Chris Milus from behind, making the crash neither unavoidable nor inherent. They claim that the skier failed to see a plainly visible person ahead, a detail that could carve a legal exception to Idaho’s immunity shield.

The Phrase “Visible or Plainly Visible” Could Change the Law

Perhaps the most consequential aspect of this case is the Idaho Supreme Court’s focus on a single phrase: “visible or plainly visible.” This wording appears in judicial interpretations of Idaho’s recreational immunity defenses and may determine whether the other skier owed a greater duty of care than normally expected.

Laura Milus argues that her husband was skiing in an open area, on a groomed run, in full view of oncoming skiers. If that is true, then any skier who failed to see him and collided from behind may be liable for negligence, not immune under Idaho’s recreational use laws. The phrase has gained traction in ski injury cases across the country, and this Idaho case could now add to a growing body of law that reexamines blanket immunity claims.

Legal experts across the U.S. have long debated how states should define “assumed risk” when one party behaves recklessly. The American Bar Association has published commentary on recreational injury claims, noting that liability often hinges on whether a danger was truly unavoidable or the result of human error. If the court agrees with Milus, it could create a powerful precedent that separates negligent skier behavior from the general risks of alpine sports.

Skier Responsibility and the Idaho Skier Safety Act

The Idaho Skier Safety Act, codified under Idaho Code § 6-1101 through § 6-1109, outlines specific responsibilities for skiers and resort operators. These responsibilities include yielding to downhill skiers, avoiding reckless behavior, and staying in control of one’s speed and direction. Failure to comply may result in liability, particularly if the skier disregards visible persons or obstacles on the slope.

Section 6-1104 of the statute states that each skier “has the primary duty to ski under control and to avoid other persons and objects.” The law places added responsibility on the uphill skier because that skier can see downhill traffic and must maneuver to prevent collisions.

In this case, if Chris Milus was skiing safely in front of the defendant and was “plainly visible,” then the other skier’s failure to slow down or change course may amount to a breach of this statutory duty. Idaho courts often defer to this act when determining fault in slope-related injury cases. But the law has rarely been tested in wrongful death cases, making the Milus litigation an important moment for Idaho’s legal community.

A helpful guide on ski collision liability is available through the National Ski Areas Association (NSAA), which promotes the Responsibility Code used at ski resorts nationwide. These principles, including yielding to those ahead, mirror Idaho law and help courts determine negligence in ski crashes.

Why the Trial Court Dismissed the Case and Why That Matters

Initially, a lower court dismissed the Milus lawsuit because the crash was an “inherent risk” of skiing and thus barred under Idaho’s immunity statute. That decision sparked immediate controversy and led to the current appeal before the Idaho Supreme Court.

The trial judge determined that skiing is inherently dangerous and that collisions between skiers, even fatal ones, are a natural consequence of that activity. However, critics of this decision argue that the court ignored factual disputes about visibility, control, and the speed of the defendant. More importantly, it treated all skier-on-skier collisions as legally unavoidable, even when one party behaved recklessly.

This kind of sweeping immunity has come under fire in other states. For example, in a landmark Colorado Supreme Court case, the court held that reckless skier behavior, particularly where basic safety rules were ignored, does not fall within the protected category of “inherent risk.” That decision has since influenced ski collision lawsuits across the West.

The Colorado Ski Safety Act, while different from Idaho’s, provides a useful comparison for understanding how other jurisdictions handle skier liability. Similar standards have also emerged in California, Utah, and Washington.

If the Idaho Supreme Court reverses the trial court’s dismissal, it will send a strong message that reckless conduct, even in a dangerous sport, is not exempt from civil responsibility.

How a Ruling Could Affect Future Wrongful Death Claims in Idaho

This case does not exist in a vacuum. If the court sides with Laura Milus, the decision could change how wrongful death cases are handled in Idaho, particularly those involving recreational sports, public land, or assumption of risk defenses.

Families who previously believed they had no legal options may now have a path forward if they can prove the at-fault party violated clear safety rules or ignored obvious hazards. This is particularly important in skiing, snowboarding, mountain biking, and ATV cases, all of which are frequently defended under Idaho’s recreational immunity statute.

A favorable ruling could also clarify when immunity applies to individual actors versus landowners or businesses. While Sun Valley Resort itself is not a defendant in the Milus lawsuit, similar cases could soon question whether ski areas owe greater duties to enforce conduct rules or warn patrons about dangerous intersections on the mountain.

Legal scholars and advocacy organizations such as Public Justice and the Consumer Federation of America have advocated for reforms that limit the misuse of immunity laws when human negligence causes harm. Their commentary helps explain why many courts are beginning to revisit these protections in light of modern recreational risks.

How Wrongful Death Claims Work in Idaho and What Families Need to Know

The case brought by Laura Milus following her husband’s fatal ski collision is a textbook example of how wrongful death law intersects with recreational immunity statutes. While many people think wrongful death claims only apply to car crashes or medical malpractice, Idaho law allows surviving family members to bring civil actions anytime someone dies due to the wrongful act or negligence of another, even in outdoor settings like ski slopes, campgrounds, and hiking trails.

Understanding how Idaho handles wrongful death cases is critical for grieving families trying to make informed decisions. It is equally important for attorneys to evaluate whether immunity laws prevent a claim or if negligence overrides those protections.

Idaho’s Wrongful Death Statute and Who Can File a Claim

Under Idaho Code § 5-311, a wrongful death claim may be filed by the decedent’s heirs or the personal representative of their estate. This includes spouses, children, parents, and sometimes siblings or dependents, depending on the family structure and circumstances of the death.

The statute allows these parties to recover for both economic losses and non-economic harms, including funeral costs, medical bills, lost income, pain and suffering, and emotional distress. This means a wrongful death case is not just about proving that someone died. It’s about showing that the death was preventable and that the survivors suffered genuine harm because of it.

The National Paralegal College offers a comprehensive breakdown of wrongful death claims across the United States, including the elements required to prove liability and the categories of recoverable damages.

In the Milus case, Laura Milus, as the surviving spouse, has standing under this statute to seek financial compensation for the loss of her husband’s life, income, companionship, and emotional support.

The Burden of Proof in a Recreational Wrongful Death Case

One of the greatest challenges in recreational wrongful death cases is the burden of proof. In Idaho, plaintiffs must show that the defendant’s actions amounted to “negligence,” which is defined as the failure to act with reasonable care under the circumstances. The key legal elements are duty, breach, causation, and damages.

This means Laura Milus must prove that the other skier had a legal duty to avoid the collision, breached that duty by skiing recklessly or inattentively, and that this breach caused her husband’s death. This legal test applies to most civil cases, but in recreational injury litigation, the defense will argue that the defendant had no duty beyond what is already “assumed” by participating in a risky activity.

That’s why the Idaho Supreme Court’s ruling on the “visible or plainly visible” language is so pivotal. If the court agrees that Chris Milus was plainly visible and the defendant failed to avoid him, that breach of duty could overcome immunity and meet Idaho’s negligence standard.

For a detailed look at how courts evaluate these claims, visit the Legal Information Institute’s wrongful death overview.

What Damages Are Available in a Boise Wrongful Death Lawsuit

A successful wrongful death claim in Idaho can result in significant financial compensation. The types of damages available fall into two primary categories: economic and non-economic. Economic damages are based on measurable financial loss, while non-economic damages reflect emotional and personal suffering.

Funeral and burial costs are typically among the first expenses covered in a wrongful death award. The National Funeral Directors Association reports that average burial costs in the United States now exceed $7,800, and that figure is often higher in mountain communities like Ketchum and Sun Valley.

If the decedent was the family’s primary earner, the survivors can also pursue compensation for lost wages and lost earning capacity. This includes the money the decedent would have earned over their lifetime, had the fatal accident not occurred. Courts will examine age, occupation, career trajectory, and education to calculate this loss.

Non-economic damages often make up a substantial portion of any award. Idaho allows claims for loss of companionship, guidance, and consortium, recognizing that human relationships are deeply valuable. The emotional trauma caused by a spouse or parent’s death can be devastating and lifelong. In particularly egregious cases, punitive damages may also apply, although Idaho courts impose strict limits on their availability.

The Idaho Judicial Branch Civil Jury Instructions outline how juries are instructed to calculate wrongful death compensation, guiding how damages must be supported by evidence and expert testimony.

The Role of Comparative Fault in Idaho Wrongful Death Cases

Idaho follows a modified comparative negligence rule, codified at Idaho Code § 6-801. Under this rule, a plaintiff may recover damages even if the decedent was partially at fault, as long as their share of the fault is less than 50%. However, the total award is reduced in proportion to that fault.

For example, if the court found Chris Milus to be 20% at fault in the ski collision, any compensation awarded to his widow would be reduced by 20%. But if the court found him to be 51% or more at fault, the claim would be barred entirely.

This legal standard makes factual details incredibly important. Ski collision cases often include disputes over speed, visibility, helmet use, signage, and whether either party made evasive efforts. In a tightly contested case like Milus v. Defendant Skier, every piece of evidence can shift the balance and determine whether justice is available.

The American Association for Justice has published numerous resources on how comparative fault doctrines impact injury and death claims, particularly in states like Idaho, where the bar is set at 50%.

Why Legal Representation Is Essential for Idaho Families After a Sudden Loss

Wrongful death litigation is emotionally draining, legally complex, and procedurally unforgiving. Deadlines are strict. Evidence disappears quickly. And insurance companies will fight aggressively to avoid paying large settlements, especially in high-profile cases with the potential to set a precedent.

That’s why families in Boise and across Blaine County need a law firm that understands the stakes and has the resources to investigate, litigate, and present a compelling case. At Montgomery Dowdle, we bring decades of combined experience in Idaho civil litigation and wrongful death advocacy. We work closely with accident reconstruction experts, financial planners, grief counselors, and medical consultants to ensure our clients receive the support they need, both in and out of the courtroom.

For more information about pursuing a wrongful death claim in Idaho, the Idaho State Bar Association offers guidance on legal rights and certified practitioners across practice areas.

Why Ski Collision Lawsuits Are Increasing in Idaho and Across the West

As outdoor recreation continues to surge in popularity, ski collision lawsuits are on the rise across the United States, and Idaho is no exception. In the wake of the Sun Valley tragedy involving Chris Milus, many families are beginning to realize that not all ski crashes are accidents without fault. Some are the direct result of reckless, inattentive, or negligent behavior.

Legal experts, insurers, and resort operators have noted a steady increase in the number of personal injury and wrongful death claims stemming from skier-on-skier collisions, particularly in Western states where alpine sports are woven into the local culture. These cases are shining a spotlight on the growing tension between personal responsibility and legal accountability on the slopes.

Why More People Are Suing After Ski Accidents

Skiing, once considered a niche or seasonal activity, has become more accessible and commercialized than ever before. Major ski resorts, including Sun Valley, Bogus Basin, Schweitzer, and Brundage in Idaho, now attract record numbers of visitors each season. As a result, more people are packed onto trails, lifts, and mountain terrain, often with widely varying skill levels and awareness of ski safety rules.

This increase in participation has led to a sharp rise in high-speed collisions, catastrophic injuries, and, tragically, fatalities. According to the National Ski Areas Association (NSAA), more than 57 million skier visits were recorded during the 2022–2023 season alone, with a rising number of serious injuries reported, especially those involving head trauma and spinal injuries.

Increased Crowding and Faster Speeds Are Creating Dangerous Conditions

At modern resorts, chairlifts move faster, and terrain parks are more elaborate. Equipment is lighter and more powerful, making it easier for intermediate skiers to reach advanced speeds without the technique to stay in control. Crowded trails and high-speed zones like those found at Sun Valley create an environment where split-second misjudgments can have fatal consequences.

Some trails, like Flying Squirrel, where Chris Milus was killed, serve as convergence points for skiers coming from multiple directions. These intersections increase the chance of crashes when skiers fail to yield, look uphill, or regulate their speed.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has repeatedly highlighted the dangers of head injuries and high-speed collisions in snow sports, urging increased education and stronger enforcement of safety protocols.

Many Skiers Are Unaware of Their Legal Responsibilities

Despite signage and posted safety codes, many skiers remain unaware that they owe a legal duty of care to others on the mountain. Idaho’s Skier Safety Act spells out these duties, including the obligation to ski in control, avoid others, and yield to downhill traffic.

When skiers ignore these duties, especially when skiing fast, distracted, or under the influence, and someone is injured or killed, Idaho law allows for civil liability. Families can sue not only for economic losses but also for emotional harm and wrongful death.

The NSAA publishes the Skier Responsibility Code, which is adopted by most major resorts. But unlike traffic laws, these rules are rarely enforced by legal authorities unless a lawsuit is filed. That’s why personal injury litigation is often the only way for victims’ families to obtain justice.

High-Profile Legal Precedents Are Reshaping Ski Lawsuits

Recent high-profile lawsuits are helping shape how courts, including those in Idaho, interpret skier liability. While ski areas typically avoid liability unless equipment or trail design is to blame, individual skiers can and do face lawsuits when their negligence leads to death or serious injury.

The Gwyneth Paltrow Trial and Public Awareness of Skier Negligence

In 2023, actress Gwyneth Paltrow was sued in Utah for a ski collision that allegedly caused a retired doctor to suffer traumatic brain injuries and broken ribs. The lawsuit drew national attention and helped educate the public about the seriousness of skier-on-skier collisions and the legal ramifications of failing to yield.

While the jury ultimately found in favor of Paltrow, the case demonstrated how civil courts evaluate skier conduct, looking at speed, control, witness accounts, and whether the uphill skier violated the skier code.

Colorado and California Courts Have Challenged Blanket Immunity Defenses

In other recent cases, courts in states like Colorado and California have allowed ski collision claims to move forward despite broad immunity laws. In 2022, the Colorado Court of Appeals allowed a lawsuit against a skier who failed to yield and injured a child, ruling that reckless skier behavior was not protected under the Colorado Ski Safety Act.

Similarly, the California Supreme Court ruled in a 2018 case that participants in recreational sports owe a duty not to increase inherent risks. This ruling was applied in several ski and snowboarding lawsuits that followed.

These cases have influenced Idaho plaintiffs, who now cite decisions from neighboring states when arguing that skier recklessness should not be legally excused. The Colorado Judicial Branch and California Courts provide public access to many of these appellate decisions.

What Idaho Families Should Do After a Skiing Accident Causes a Death

When a loved one is killed in a skiing incident, most families are overwhelmed by grief, logistics, and unanswered questions. In these emotional moments, few realize that the actions taken in the days and weeks after the crash can determine whether a legal case can even move forward.

Prompt Investigation Preserves Critical Evidence

In ski collision cases, evidence disappears fast. Ski patrol clears the scene. Witnesses scatter. Surveillance footage is overwritten. Families should retain an experienced wrongful death attorney immediately to help gather scene photos, GoPro or helmet cam footage, resort communications, and trail reports.

Medical records from local hospitals such as St. Luke’s Wood River Medical Center in nearby Ketchum can establish injury patterns that match collision descriptions. An attorney can also request toxicology results, ski lift access logs, and trail maintenance records.

Without this evidence, families face an uphill battle in court, especially when the defense argues that the crash was just “part of the sport.”

Know the Statute of Limitations for Wrongful Death Claims

In Idaho, families generally have two years from the date of death to file a wrongful death lawsuit, per Idaho Code § 5-219. After that window closes, courts will likely dismiss the case, even if the facts clearly show negligence.

However, in cases involving government land, ski patrol negligence, or defective equipment, additional procedural deadlines under the Idaho Tort Claims Act may apply. It is essential to consult a lawyer early to avoid losing legal rights.

Legal Action Can Provide Closure and Community Safety

While no amount of money can undo the loss of a spouse, parent, or child, filing a wrongful death lawsuit can provide closure and protect others from suffering the same fate. When legal accountability forces careless skiers or unresponsive resort operators to change their practices, it serves a greater purpose.

Many ski-related lawsuits have resulted in improved signage, better trail merging zones, mandatory safety videos, and disciplinary systems for skiers who disregard safety rules. Several resorts, including those in Utah and California, now partner with local law enforcement to prosecute particularly reckless acts as a direct result of families who took action after preventable tragedies.

How Montgomery Dowdle Advocates for Families in Skiing Fatalities and Recreational Wrongful Death Cases

When tragedy strikes on the slopes, grieving families need more than sympathy; they need a legal team that can take immediate, decisive action. At Montgomery Dowdle, we provide precisely that. Our attorneys bring years of experience in Idaho personal injury and wrongful death litigation, including cases involving fatal skiing collisions, hiking accidents, off-road vehicle crashes, and other recreation-related tragedies. We know the legal terrain, the court system, and the specific defenses these cases often face.

From the moment you contact our firm, we begin building a comprehensive claim rooted in investigation, compassion, and results. If your loved one was killed in a preventable ski collision, as in the Sun Valley case involving Chris Milus, we are prepared to take on the legal burden so you can focus on healing.

We Move Quickly to Preserve Evidence and Secure Witness Testimony

Time is critical in ski fatality cases. Ski patrol clears scenes within minutes. Trail conditions change with every snowfall. And surveillance footage is often deleted or overwritten within days. That’s why we immediately launched a detailed investigation even before the resort finished its internal report.

Accident Reconstruction and Site Mapping

We partner with leading experts in ski accident reconstruction to model how the collision occurred. These experts analyze trail design, skier trajectory, weather conditions, and visibility. Their reports often reveal whether the skier who caused the fatality violated the Skier Responsibility Code or Idaho’s statutory duties under Idaho Code § 6-1104, which requires skiers to remain in control and avoid others.

Using GPS data, ski pass scans, GoPro footage, and eyewitness interviews, we recreate the events with precision. This allows us to dispute common defenses such as “it was just an accident” or “the victim assumed the risk.”

We Locate and Preserve Critical Evidence Before It Is Lost

In many cases, nearby businesses, condos, or base lodges have surveillance footage showing trail intersections or lift areas near the crash. We issue legal preservation notices and subpoenas when necessary to secure this footage before it’s lost. We also track down eyewitnesses, including other skiers or ski patrol members who may have observed dangerous behavior in the moments before the crash.

When appropriate, we file court motions to compel ski resorts or defendants to release trail safety records, prior incident reports, and employee witness statements. Our swift action helps ensure that no detail is missed.

We Handle the Legal Process With Compassion and Clarity

Wrongful death claims are emotionally intense. Families are often overwhelmed with funeral costs, estate responsibilities, and unanswered questions. At Montgomery Dowdle, we understand the grief behind every case. We provide clear, honest communication and make sure you understand every legal step, from investigation to settlement or trial.

Filing the Claim and Managing Statutory Deadlines

Idaho’s two-year statute of limitations under Idaho Code § 5-219 applies to all wrongful death lawsuits. We make sure your claim is filed properly, on time, and in the correct jurisdiction, often Blaine County for Sun Valley-related deaths, or Ada County for Boise-area families.

We also guide families through probate matters, including the appointment of the estate’s representative if required. That allows us to proceed with a lawsuit even if the deceased did not have a formal will or estate plan in place.

Negotiating With Insurance and Defense Counsel

In most ski collision cases, the at-fault skier will be covered by a homeowner’s or renter’s insurance policy, which often includes personal liability coverage. We handle all communication with insurers and defense attorneys, refusing to accept lowball offers or tactics that blame the victim.

Our attorneys are trained negotiators who fight for full compensation, including funeral expenses, loss of companionship, medical bills, and projected lost income. When necessary, we prepare every case for trial and present expert witnesses to explain the lifelong financial and emotional toll of the death.

The Idaho Department of Insurance outlines your rights when negotiating with insurers, but having an experienced lawyer makes all the difference when wrongful death compensation is at stake.

We Are Prepared to Take Recreational Wrongful Death Claims to Trial

Not every case settles, especially when the defense tries to hide behind recreational immunity laws or argues that the crash was “just part of the sport.” We are trial-ready and unafraid to present your case before a jury.

Challenging Recreational Immunity in Idaho Courts

The outcome of the Milus case before the Idaho Supreme Court may redefine how courts interpret Idaho’s recreational immunity statute in fatal skiing incidents. But even now, our firm knows how to build strong arguments that skier-on-skier collisions involve personal negligence, not just “inherent risks.”

We cite national cases and rulings from states like Colorado, California, and Utah, where courts have carved out exceptions to immunity when skiers behave recklessly or ignore basic safety codes. When the facts are on your side, immunity can and should be overcome.

Presenting Expert Testimony and Life Care Analyses

We work with economists, life care planners, and forensic psychologists to demonstrate the full impact of a wrongful death. Whether the deceased was a parent, spouse, or sole earner, we quantify the financial and emotional loss in real terms, helping juries understand why full compensation is justified.

Our trial strategy is always tailored to the facts of your case and the values of Idaho juries. We bring local insight, legal experience, and compassionate advocacy to every courtroom appearance.

Our Commitment to Idaho Families Extends Beyond the Lawsuit

At Montgomery Dowdle, we don’t view clients as case files. We view them as families navigating grief, injustice, and a system that can be difficult to trust. That’s why our advocacy doesn’t end with a settlement or court judgment.

We help our clients connect with grief counseling, community support groups, and long-term planning resources. We also advocate for ski safety reforms, public awareness campaigns, and policy changes that prevent similar tragedies in the future.

The Idaho Office of Victim Services and national support networks like The Compassionate Friends offer healing resources for families coping with the sudden loss of a loved one.

Speak With a Boise Wrongful Death Attorney Who Understands Ski Collision Tragedies

If someone you love was killed in a ski accident, recreational incident, or any event involving negligence on Idaho’s slopes, trails, or resorts, you deserve answers and experienced legal help. At Montgomery Dowdle, we are proud to represent families throughout Boise, Blaine County, and across Idaho who are grieving unthinkable loss due to preventable accidents.

We understand the pain and confusion that follow a tragedy like the one that claimed Chris Milus’ life at Sun Valley Resort. And we understand how frustrating it is to hear that a fatal ski collision might be “just part of the risk.” When negligence causes death, immunity should not mean impunity.

Contact our Boise wrongful death lawyers today to schedule a free, no-obligation consultation. You do not owe us a fee unless we win your case.

Visit our contact page or call us directly at (208) 378-8882.

We’re here to help. Let us stand beside you and fight for the justice your family deserves.