Vail Resorts begins providing documents in labor lawsuit, but plaintiffs argue company is avoiding direct answers
Tentative schedule suggests potential plaintiffs could receive notice of their ability to opt in to the case as early as Jan. 19
Chris Dillmann/Vail Daily archive
A long-running Fair Labor Standards Act case against Vail Resorts has entered the discovery phase, with the plaintiffs arguing that the company’s documents are insufficient.
The case, filed in 2020 by current and former Beaver Creek employees Randy Dean Quint, John Linn, and Mark Molina, alleges that Vail Resorts failed to pay employees for all hours worked; failed to provide proper meal and/or rest periods; failed to reimburse key equipment purchases and committed numerous other labor standards violations. Vail Resorts has denied the allegations.
In August, U.S. Magistrate Judge N. Reid Neureiter ordered Vail Resorts to begin producing records, including personnel files, pay and timekeeping records, and company policies and handbooks.
The company, in a Dec. 2 filing, said since Neureiter’s August ruling, it has dedicated hundreds of hours to providing discovery.
“Defendant has provided complete responses to all of Plaintiffs’ Interrogatories, other than those that are obviously not proportional to the needs of the case,” according to the Dec. 2 filing.
Support Local Journalism
But the plaintiffs are contending that Vail Resorts did not meet the court’s August and September 2025 deadlines to provide “substantive responses” to emails and interrogatories dating back to 2021. When the company finally served responses on Sept. 17, the plaintiffs say the answers were “nonresponsive, evasive and incomplete.”
The statement cites multiple examples, accusing Vail Resorts of avoiding direct answers to questions about whether it paid employees for specific categories of work time. Plaintiffs also claim that Vail Resorts has only recently begun to check the availability of certain pay-related records — records the court had ordered produced months earlier.
“The documents, individually or collectively, did not answer any of the interrogatories,” the plaintiffs argue.
Vail Resorts’ attorneys said they are willing to provide more information at a later date.
“Defendant has also agreed to supplement many of its Interrogatory responses based on its ongoing investigation and discussions with Plaintiff’s counsel,” the attorneys said in the Dec. 2 filing.
In a Dec. 4 hearing, Neureiter ordered Vail Resorts to provide those supplemental interrogatory responses by Dec. 15, and also assigned a special master to help review the numerous documents in the case, noting that “a master may be appointed in the event that discovery disputes cannot be effectively and timely addressed by the assigned Magistrate Judge.”
Magistrate Judge Kristen Mix has been assigned as the special master in the case.
Vail Resorts has also been ordered to provide a list of employees who could make up the class in the class-action lawsuit. After receiving and reviewing the last, the court’s next step would be to approve a notice schedule, in which all employees who could participate in the lawsuit would be notified that they are eligible.
Assuming that Vail Resorts provides workable data and the notice schedule is approved, the court provided a tentative schedule in a Nov. 26 filing. That schedule says notice would be provided Jan. 19, and potential plaintiffs would have until March 23 to opt in.
