A nasty fall on a train platform puts Larry Mendte face to face with some widely held attitudes that seem to treat litigiousness as a given [Philadelphia Magazine via Common Good].
A nasty fall on a train platform puts Larry Mendte face to face with some widely held attitudes that seem to treat litigiousness as a given [Philadelphia Magazine via Common Good].
4 Comments
Yeah, I’m not seeing it. Torts wasn’t my best class, but there don’t seem to be any overlooked banana peels or falling scales here.
^^ Amtrak and Penn Station had a duty to take reasonable measures to keep their patrons safe from (and/or warn of) dangerous conditions on their premises (in this case, the slippery platform). They didn’t, he slipped and fell on his face, and that’s all you need for a modern slip-and-fall law suit.
And maybe he wants to go after the shoe maker/supplier/retailer, too, but products liability cases are more expensive to litigate.
Poignant editorial. This past January my kid (age 6) slipped while climbing on the school bus; nasty gash, bled like Niagara Falls. After a bunch of stitches we got home to apologetic voice mails from the driver and sundry school officials. All of our friends asked if we planned to sue – like it was only a fool who would not sue. It was kind of creepy – not, “how’s your kid?” or “how many stitches?” People repeatedly wanted to refer me to a friend who does personal injury law. Nope, no suit, no plans for one – and my kid now grabs rails whenever he climbs on to things.
He never identified what made him slip. Which certainly makes his editorial odd.
New leather shoes could be one thing (of which he would be obviously aware).
Leaky oil from overhead mechanical equipment could be another.
And that would lead to very different results.