I feel I'm playing Devil's advocate here - but the fact that he hit a rope at the jaw/face level - means the closure was marked. Could it be that he just didn't see it? Sure. Could it be he was skiing out of control and couldn't stop? Could be. Could it be the marking was hard to see? Possibly. It could have been white-out conditions for all we know - doesn't mean you can ski into s*#t and sue people for it.
Could it be this family needs to realize that skiing is dangerous and that's why we wear all sorts of protective gear - and even still there's a chance of getting hurt? Absolutely.
I'm with Pinto, in that I'm not passing judgement on the case due to lack of information.
I'm with Skigirl27, because most of what she said, playing devils advocate,
could be the best view of the ski resort intent with markings.
I see this from the view point of a recreational enthusiast, a volunteer(responsible for young children)for the ski program at a small school, and a Risk Management officer at a local motorcycle track.
The recreational enthusiast knows that there are hazards to be looked out for while doing what I do.
The school volunteer knows that a 9 year old is not going to be as attentative as he should, because he has the attention span of a 9 year old.
The Risk Management officer in me knows that it is extremely difficult to continue to promote extreme sports, as more lawsuits pop up, and more responsibility is piled on promoters to protect the participants from their passions.
I found this snip from the article interesting:
How much does the strength of the rope weigh, (while color of the rope does not seem to be brought up)
The court found the procedure that uses rope with 2,440 pound test capacity to be negligent.