Chronicling the high cost of our legal system
Posts tagged as:
“A judge has awarded more than $6.7 million to the family of a Northeastern University student who fell down a set of stairs at a Boston bar in 2007 and died after a night of drinking. The judge’s award comes about three months after a jury ruled the bar violated the city building code but was not liable for the 21-year-old man’s death.” [Boston Globe; Herald; MyFoxBoston]
{ 2 comments }
By reader acclaim: the family of a Pennsylvania woman who attended — but did not participate in — a New Jersey “Polar Bear Plunge” charity event has sued the event sponsors and many others. Tracy Hottenstein was last seen alive around 2:15 a.m. on the night of drinking after the festivities, and was later discovered in the bay having, per Cape May County authorities, “died accidentally from hypothermia and acute intoxication.” In addition to the event sponsors, the suit names “the owners of two bars she was at on the night she died and the couple who invited her to dinner at their home that evening. Also named is the hospital where she died and the doctor who pronounced her dead, as well as the Sea Isle City Police Department and individual officers who — the suit claims — did not allow rescue workers to perform lifesaving treatment for hypothermia after they discovered Hottenstein had no pulse.” [AP/NJ.com]
{ 5 comments }
After a pedestrian was hit by a truck and suffered a broken elbow and other injuries, he began to drink excessively and developed clinical alcoholism with serious health consequences. Doctors testified that the man’s “pain and mood” following the injury contributed to this development, in combination with genetic predisposition (both his parents were alcoholics). A judge in the province of British Columbia found that the “alcohol abuse was caused by the Accident and that such alcohol abuse was reasonably foreseeable,” so that compensation for it could be recovered as part of the lawsuit. [BC Injury Law]
{ 4 comments }
Hoping to ride for free, 16-year-old Delvonte Tisdale stowed away in the landing gear of a US Airways flight but fell to his death in the Boston area. Now his family is suing, represented by Florida attorney Christopher Chestnut, who argues that the lad “should never have successfully gained access to that airplane. Had airport security been up to par, he would be alive and well with his family today.” [Boston Globe and more via TortsProf, BoingBoing]
{ 10 comments }
He loses a suit arguing that the bar should have checked patrons for weapons. [Point of Law]
{ 2 comments }
Kevin at Lowering the Bar spots a promising new theory in a defense expert’s testimony, though it’s not clear the lawyers actually wound up making use of it. [Vail Daily, same at Denver Post]
{ 3 comments }
By reversing a grant of summary judgment, a Louisiana court has reinstated a suit alleging that the manufacturer of a 50-year-old oil pump should have reasonably anticipated that a 13-year-old boy would climb onto its moving pendulum and attempt to ride it for fun, thus injuring himself. As evidence that such a use was reasonably foreseeable, plaintiffs offered three instances in which kids had been hurt attempting similar stunts in other states — all of which, as it happened, had occurred well after the making of the Louisiana pump, leaving it unclear in what way they could have served to put its manufacturer “on notice” of anything. [Sean Wajert]
{ 4 comments }
An “Only in America” story? Not this time: “A Brazilian court ruled this week that McDonald’s must pay a former franchise manager $17,500 because he gained 65 pounds while working there for a dozen years.” [AP/USA Today] More: Lowering the Bar.
{ 4 comments }
“The Wisconsin Court of Appeals has refused to follow a convicted child molester ‘down the rabbit hole’ and allow her to sue the parents of the 13-year-old boy she assaulted for failing to protect him from her.” [Matthew Heller, OnPoint News]
{ 5 comments }
British attorney Nick Freeman “is notorious for using legal loopholes to successfully defend celebrity clients accused of motoring offenses. But Mr. Loophole, as he is nicknamed, last week refused to use his expertise to get his daughter off a speeding charge…. ‘Sophie had to understand the consequences of breaking the law,’ [he said].” [Patrick Kingsley, Guardian]
{ 2 comments }
The suit argues that the student wasn’t given adequate warning that attaching electrical clamps to his nipples could be dangerous. Earlier reportage on the case quoted students who accused the teacher of encouraging horseplay and making light of the dangers of mild shocks; the teacher later resigned but did not face criminal charges. [Joey Cresta, Foster's Daily Democrat/Boston Herald (Dover, New Hampshire)] More: Lowering the Bar (“Nor am I buying the Mountain-Dew-enticement allegations.”)
{ 10 comments }
In May 2001, Cheryl Jane Hale was driving four children to a sleepover in her 1987 Ford Bronco. She didn’t bother to have the children wear their seat belts, so, when she took her eyes off the road to argue with the backseat passengers, and thus drove off the road and flipped the car, 12-year-old Jesse Branham was thrown from the car and suffered brain damage. A jury in Hampton County, South Carolina (the second jury to be impaneled—the first one was dismissed in a mistrial when it was discovered after two weeks of trial that five of the jurors were former clients of Branham’s lawyers) decided that this was only 45% Hale’s fault, held Ford 55% responsible, which puts Ford entirely on the hook for $31 million in damages.
On Monday, the South Carolina Supreme Court reversed because of prejudicial closing arguments that relied heavily on inadmissible evidence. More importantly for lawyers practicing in South Carolina, the Court adopted “the risk-utility test with its requirement of showing a feasible alternative design.”
How bad of a judicial hellhole is Hampton County? Though Hale was a co-defendant, she cooperated with the plaintiffs throughout the trial in their case against Ford, even sitting at the plaintiffs’ table; but because the judge classified Hale as a co-defendant, it meant that Hale got half of the peremptory challenges of the “defense.” More from Comer; no press coverage that I’ve seen yet. (cross-posted from Point of Law)
{ 2 comments }
Citing text messages she sent her boyfriend shortly before the incident, Montana prosecutors contend that Justine Winter’s crash at 85 mph into an oncoming vehicle was a deliberate suicide attempt. Winter, who faces trial on homicide charges in the deaths of Erin Thompson, the woman she ran into, and Thompson’s 13-year-old son, has now sued Thompson’s estate as well as the construction company that built the interstate overpass where the accident occurred. [Daily Inter Lake, Siouxsie Law]
{ 11 comments }
Springfield, Ohio: “The family of a man who was hit by a train while jumping off a trestle into a river two years ago is suing the railroad and a local canoe center.” The canoe company, according to the complaint, “knew or should have known that individuals frequently went onto the train trestle and jumped into the Mad River.” [Springfield News-Sun]
{ 9 comments }
It resulted in a lost product liability action against the pool maker in a recent Rhode Island case [Abnormal Use]
{ 2 comments }
A New York appeals court has tossed a jury’s $2.3 million award to a man who fell onto the Union Square subway tracks and lost his leg. The court focused on the jury’s acceptance of what it said was speculative testimony from experts arguing that the train’s motorman should have stopped faster. The victim “said he was too drunk to remember how he ended up on the tracks or anything about the accident.” [AP/WINS, New York Post, Dibble v. NYCTA, earlier, and compare $6 million track totterer award last year] More: John Hochfelder.
{ 1 comment }
Oshawa, Canada: “A lawsuit launched by a woman who drunkenly jumped from a moving car during an argument with her partner could make drivers liable for intoxicated passengers who cause themselves harm.” [DurhamRegion.com, Toronto Star, Globe and Mail]
{ 8 comments }
Lauren Rosenberg of Los Angeles “is suing Google because Google Maps issued directions that told her to walk down a rural highway. She started walking down the highway — which had no sidewalk or pedestrian paths — and was struck by a car.” [Sarah Jacobsson, PC World; Seth Weintraub, Fortune ("If Google told you to jump off a cliff, would you?"); Lowering the Bar; BoingBoing, Search Engine Land]
{ 7 comments }
Individual liberty, free markets, and peace: the world's premier libertarian think tank. Publishes Cato at Liberty, where I blog on contemporary policy issues.
Get your copy today! My new book tackles the question of why so many bad ideas come from the law schools. "Cutting-edge commentary, hard-hitting, witty, astute." -- Publisher's Weekly. "Excellent... A fine dissection of these strangely powerful institutions" -- Wall Street Journal.