Jason Lhotka Summary

The main character of the story fantasy league is a twelve year old boy named Charlie gaines. This book was written by mike lupica. this boy is a very caring and loving young boy. He is very intelligent. He is very observant and very quick on picking plays up.He shows and helps many people like the football coach. The coach is the nfl coach for the los angeles bulldogs.

In order to continue climbing Everest, many aspects of climbing need to be improved before more people endanger their lives to try and reach the roof of the world. The guides have some areas that need the most reform. During the ascension of Everest the guides made a plethora mistakes that seemed insignificant but only aided in disaster. The guides first mistake is allowing “any bloody idiot [with enough determination] up” Everest (Krakauer 153). By allowing “any bloody idiot” with no climbing experience to try and climb the most challenging mountain in the world, the guides are almost inviting trouble. Having inexperienced climbers decreases the trust a climbing team has in one another, causing an individual approach to climbing the mountain and more reliance on the guides. While this approach appears fine, this fault is seen in addition to another in Scott Fischer’s expedition Mountain Madness. Due to the carefree manner in which the expedition was run, “clients [moved] up and down the mountain independently during the acclimation period, [Fischer] had to make a number of hurried, unplanned excursions between Base Camp and the upper camps when several clients experienced problems and needed to be escorted down,” (154). Two problems present in the Mountain Madness expedition were seen before the summit push: the allowance of inexperienced climbers and an unplanned climbing regime. A third problem that aided disaster was the difference in opinion in regards to the responsibilities of a guide on Everest. One guide “went down alone many hours ahead of the clients” and went “without supplemental oxygen” (318). These three major issues: allowing anyone up the mountain, not having a plan to climb Everest and differences in opinion. All contributed to the disaster on Everest in

1) Yes. Defendant owes no duty to protect Adair from the harm he alleges because an inherent risk of rock climbing includes the negligence of co-participants as well as the danger of falling.

Accordingly, Marty Nemko, in his article, establishes college to be a deceiving business that is suitable only to a selective, precise percentile of high school graduates. In addition, Nemko states throughout the self-explanatory article that deciding to proceed to college will not necessarily guarantee a successful, effective outcome for students. Moreover, he covers most areas that involve, or revolve around, college. For instance, education, unemployment, debt and jobs subsequent to college are some of the risks that one must ponder and determine if college is worth it in the end. Furthermore, Nemko discloses the actuality of college and how it is unfavorable for most people. However, he does not discourage high school graduates to still

The case of Mt. Everest focuses on two commercial expeditions, Adventure Consultants and Mountain Madness, and the tragic event on May 10, 1996. These two commercial expeditions were lead by Rob Hall and Scott Fischer, and were consisted of 20 members. Both leaders were experienced climbers, but due to several factors, the expedition resulted into five deaths including Hall and Fischer. The event has thought managers to evaluate the importance of leadership together with its internal and external factors that managers should consider to survive in the high risk business world.

In the book “Into thin air” by Jon Krakauer, Krakauer sought to report and write about his climb up mount everest. He knew it wouldn't be easy, but he did not and could not have predicted the barriers and conflicts that were inflicted upon him, by the mountain and it’s atmosphere. Due to these barriers and conflicts, it would be naive to say that the main conflict wasn’t man vs nature. Nevertheless, Krakauer had the worst experience of his life, climbing and fighting against the physical and mental effects of Mount Everest.

“Don't be afraid to have a reality check. Taking risks is OK, but you must be realistic.” Joy Mangano. This proves that although risk-taking can be accepted, you must be experienced in the risk that you’re taking in order to be safe. My first source, Helicopter Rescues Increasing on Everest is transcribed from Robert Siegel’s radio show, and is a nonfiction radio interview whose purpose is to inform readers. Another source I analyzed is “Why Everest?” The article was authored by Guy Moreau and is a nonfiction article that is meant to inform readers. The third source I researched is Ranger Killed During Rescue of Climbers on Mount Rainier and is a nonfiction newspaper article meant to inform readers. The author of the article is The Seattle Times. People do not have the right to rescue services when they put themselves at risk because it puts more people at risk, it is cost-heavy, and because they choose to risk their lives.

Craig admitted to his breach of duty of care and settled a suit with the plaintiff Alex Johnson. Craig is the only one liable in this incident, not the ski resort or its employees. Both employees acted professionally and chose the best slope based on his skill level.

Rob Hall, the Kiwi guide of the Everest expedition group of Adventure Consultants, was the head guide during the terrible accidents of 1996. He led his team through many obstacles, facing them head on and never faltering until his last moments. Even in his dying breath he didn’t succumb to fear and didn’t want anyone to worry about him. Rob Hall would not leave Doug Hansen alone, even though he knew Hansen would die eventually, and didn’t desert him until there was a 100 percent certainty that Hansen was dead. Even though Hall himself had told all of the Adventure

With regard to Ms. Green’s claims against O’Brien, it is apparent that Ms. Green was O’Brien’s client, and that O’Brien owed Ms. Green a duty. Should this case proceed to trial we do not anticipate that we would argue to a jury that O’Brien did not neglect this duty. Rather, there are serious questions as to whether “the negligence resulted in and was the proximate cause of loss to the client.” Kendall v. Rogers, 181 Md. 606, 611-12 (1943). Indeed, the estate will have to demonstrate that Ms. Green would have prevailed in proving that one or both health care provider defendants committed medical negligence that caused her to fall into the diabetic coma.

The first reason why Krakauer is responsible for the crew’s death is because he recruited them. Krakauer knew who he was recruiting, some experienced and some who relied heavily on the guide’s help. “I want you all to remember we have absolutely no chance of getting to the summit of Everest without their help.” (Krakauer 4:43). This shows how weak each member is without the help of a professional guide. While Krakauer knows the death rate on the trek to the top of Everest is high, he knew deep down it’d be a bad idea to bring inexperienced climbers onto this dangerous mountain.” Ever since 1922, when seven Sherpas were killed in an avalanche during the second British expedition, a disproportionate number of Sherpas have died on Everest—fifty-three all told.” ( Krakauer 4.17). This quote proves how dangerous Everest is even for experienced and

In the passage “Into the Death Zone” by Sean McCollum Jordan attempted to climb Mt. Everest and succeded but his father was not into the idea of her going. Jordan’s father told her that it was a dangerous idea to climb Mt. Everest because many people did not survive. There were 11,000 who attempted the climb, 220 people died, 4,500 summits, and 150 corpses still on the mountain. Mt. Everest is 29,034 feet high. Jordan only being 13 year old attempted after convincing her father being one of the youngest to do it. But what if she did not make it or became seriously injured. Her father would be extremely disappointed in her and he could do nothing but to let it go. Her father warned her and she would probably stop climbing because of her father’s

The Harvard Business School case Mount Everest – 1996 narrates the events of May 11, 1996, when 8 people-including the two expedition leaders— died during a climb to the tallest mountain in the world (five deaths are described in the case, three border police form India also died that day). This was dubbed the “deadliest day in the mountain’s history” (at least until April 18, 2014). The survivors and many analysts have tried to decipher what went wrong that day, find an underlying cause, and learn from the event.

On May 10, 1996 six people died trying to reach the summit of Mt. Everest. These people were parts of two expeditions that were in the Himalayas, preparing to ascend the summit for six weeks. The first group was under the direction of Rob Hall, who had put 39 paying clients on the summit in five years. Hall was considered the leader of the mountain and the man to see no matter what the discrepancy. Group two, headed by Fisher, who like Hall, was trying to start a profitable business in providing the experience of climbing Mt. Everest to all for the price of 60 to 70 thousand dollars. Unfortunatly, neither man would live to tell the tale of this expedition.

Lhotka, who died from altitude-related illness when he went on a trip sponsored by Geographic Expedition's (the Defedant) on Mount Kilimanjaro with his mother named Sandra Menefee (the Plaintiff). They signed a limitation of liability and release form from GeoEx as required. The purpose of the form is to discharge GeoEx from all liability related with the expedition and abandon claims for liability in which it stated "to the maximum extent permitted by law". Also, the form needs each of the parties to submit any conflict between themselves, and binding arbitration. GeoEx president indicating that it was necessary and same forms required by any other travel companies since Lhotka had to compensate GeoEx for all costs if he appear an action against