Jones v. Dressel

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that flight service for parachute jumping was not a matter of public interest
• holding the skydiving service provided by defendants \was not an essential service\
• holding an exculpatory release related to skydiving services was not an unenforceable adhesion contract \because the service provided ... was not an essential service\ and therefore the defendant \did not possess a decisive advantage of bargaining strength over\ the plaintiff
• using the Tunkl factors to determine whether the public interest prong of Colorado's four-part test has been met
• four factors: existence of a duty to the public (determined by the Tunkl factors); the nature of the service performed; whether the agreement was fairly entered into; clear and unambiguous language
• de novo review of validity of exculpatory clause prospectively releasing liability claims

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).