As a student of law, I completely agree with almost everything Woozy has said. Just because the ski resort takes precautions does not mean that it has taken what the jury will determine to be "reasonable precautions". The fact is that jury's don't want to side with a company when a child is hurt. If the business has taken precautions above and beyond what the jury might perceive as "reasonable," then they are in a better situation to defend these types of cases.
As far as the back of the ticket goes....you don't always need a signature to constitute the forming of the contract. In may cases, and in most states, the paying for a lift ticket in exchange for access to chairlifts would be sufficient consideration to form a contract. The problem is that the injured is a minor, and it is difficult to hold a minor liable for a contract that they have formed with an adult or a corporation.
The fact that the kid hit the jump without a helmet and without goggles might help the ski resort to prevail in this case, but that does not mean that ski resorts should not take the utmost care in ensuring that all reasonable care has been taken to avoid injuries.
It will be interesting to see how and on what grounds this case is decided.
