God this pisses me off!!!!

[grue 1]

Incidentally, if there is any way that they could be awarded money UNLESS there was negligence, well, that will be another reason for me to hate the legal system.

cavete terrae.

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

that will be another reason for me to hate the legal system.

You hate the whole legal system? Please elaborate...

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[aprilcat 0]

I understand why the parents want to sue, though I don't condone it. I can't even comprehend their pain or grief. I hope I never do. And I hope they are not reading that they are being called "fuckers."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I agree with you and I have a question. Would posting angry comments to the representatives open a gateway to a subpoena?

I'm thinking if these lawyers got their hands on some of the comments posted here, they'd have a field day with the lack of compassion shown to these particular families, which would HELP their case.

I hope I never have to feel what they feel either. My condolences (sp) to everyone connected to this tragedy ~~April

Camelot II, the Electric Boogaloo!

[happythoughts 0]

I was surprised that Rob & Rob is their names, not just a business name. No irony there.

From their website:

Quote

a $27.5 million settlement on behalf of skydivers killed in a small plane crash (highest total settlement for a small plane crash)

Quote

FOR OVER TWENTY YEARS, OUR LAW FIRM’S AVIATION FOCUS HAS BEEN ON REPRESENTING FAMILIES IN PRIVATE AIRCRASH LAWSUITS.

...four years as Co-Chair of the Aviation Litigation Committee of the American Bar Association (ABA) Section of Litigation

...published articles in TRIAL Magazine on
“How to Select and Use Aviation Experts,”
“General Aviation Cases: Investigating the Case and Knowing the Law and Applicable Rules.”

His presentation at the most recent Aviation Section program at the ATLA Annual Convention in Toronto was on “Damages in Aviation Cases.”

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Would posting angry comments to the representatives open a gateway to a subpoena?

I'm thinking if these lawyers got their hands on some of the comments posted here, they'd have a field day with the lack of compassion shown to these particular families, which would HELP their case.

Look at the crosscomplaint skyride filed. It contained quotes from posts on this website.

THink it won't be used? Hah. This place is a goldmine...

For those without personal knowledge you don't need to worry much. For those who posted their conclusions, etc., yeah, it's definitely possible, though not likely.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[grue 1]

I hate the fact that people are essentially encouraged to sue, and that they can make millions of dollars doing it.

cavete terrae.

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

I hate the fact that people are essentially encouraged to sue, and that they can make millions of dollars doing it.

Well, I don't think the legal system encourages people to sue. It gives them the opportunity to do so.
Although i find the amount of lawsuits a bad joke gone wrong in the US, it does serve a purpose.
We'd be surprised how many business owners do take extra safety measures nowaday not only to increase safety, but to cover themselves against potential lawsuits (I'm not necessarily talking about skydiving here).
There are abuses of the system as it is. If one couldn't sue, there would be abuses the other way.
I think overall, though, the US legal system is not that bad.

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[normiss 893]

I had been wondering where you were on this topic.
Thanks for being "one of THE TWO" - decent and respectable lawyers around...from what we can see here anyway!

[Bolas 5]

The actual plaintiffs usually only get half or less. Sometimes much less if they got any sort of pre-settlement advance for expenses. If the judgment is a structured payment plan ($X a month for X years) people sell those plans for a lump sum of an even smaller amount.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[ACMESkydiver 0]

Their attorney has them suing the deceased pilot?


What an asshole.

~Jaye
Do not believe that possibly you can escape the reward of your action.

[grue 1]

Quote

The actual plaintiffs usually only get half or less. Sometimes much less if they got any sort of pre-settlement advance for expenses. If the judgment is a structured payment plan ($X a month for X years) people sell those plans for a lump sum of an even smaller amount.

I dislike the lawyers getting rich off of it even more. You end up with dirtbag assholes pressuring people to sue for no good reason. Like this case.

cavete terrae.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Judges who award settlements in extreme amounts to plantiffs have ENCOURAGED this behavior from lawyers for years.

Judges don't award settlements. Settlements are done by agreement of the parties. They actually leave judges and juries out of it.

Quote

Painful part is we as voters put them on the bench

Ever hear of a ridiculously large bench verdict? No. Juries award the mega-verdicts. Not judges.

---

The rest of your post is dealing with political issues that judges have little control over, and that lawyers (with the exception of lobbying power) have little control over.

Quote

Judges don't award settlements. Settlements are done by agreement of the parties. They actually leave judges and juries out of it.

LAW 101

Quote

Ever hear of a ridiculously large bench verdict? No. Juries award the mega-verdicts. Not judges.

True, but at the same time, there is no such thing as a jury verdit in reality. The judge can order a Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict and reduce, increase or throw-out the judgement.

[Taylor610 0]

Their attorney has them suing the deceased pilot?
***

They sue everyone involved. If they can use the pending suit to "tie-up" the estate of the pilot, and because he is co-owner of the DZ, then they tie up "little-guys" (the DZ) life line (their finances). The effort here is to get the multiple defendants up in arms with each other. Then they hope they can get them trying to dunk each other into the grease. Makes for ugly law suits, easy to win. The sad part is in a lot of these cases, the little guy can't even afford to defend themselves because of the cost of long, drawn out depositions, investigations, and general pot stirring. Sad as it is, even when there is no negligence involved, the expense can be to much for survival of the smaller defendants in these cases.

It sucks, but unless there is some tort reform put in place, then frivolous suits will continue, that involve suing everyone that the lawyers can name. They will also search sites like this just to see if there were any ill feelings going on in the community and try to use that to their benefit too if they can.

[freefal 0]

Lawrocket, you're right and I wish I could retract my earlier name calling of the family (too late to edit my post now). You were (hopefully) not as close to the particular people in this crash so you're post wasn't as emotionally driven as mine. I wrote something in the heat of the moment and didn't fully think it through. If the Delacroix family is reading this, then I apoligize and hope that you can get through this difficult time and realize that many people are going through the same thing you are.

My assumtion is that the lawyer probably contacted the family which only adds to my distaste for the lawyer. Even if the family made the initial contact, they are going through something I can't imagine (I have a daughter) so I can understand how their anger/sadness/frustration could erupt into something like this. If that's the case, then it's unfortunate that they acted without stepping back and looking at the big picture or trying to share their emotions with the other families and friends who are going the same thing.

All this aside, not all lawyers a bad. My father was a lawyer and a very good man. I have some friends who are lawyers as well. This particular lawyer though is they type that give the good ones a bad name and as I said before, if I see him... square in the nuts!

"Ignorance is bliss" and "Patience is a virtue"... So if you're stupid and don't mind waiting around for a while, I guess you can have a pretty good life!

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

The judge can order a Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict and reduce, increase or throw-out the judgement.

And in the case of ridiculously large verdicts, judges usually DO throw them out.In the McDonald's case, the judge immediately reduced the 3 million punitives award to $480k - three times the compensatory damages of $160k. The case then settled before an appeal.

So it's kind of striking, isn't it, that the McDonald's case that is so legendary about runaway law was an example of judges reeling an out of control verdict (some say) in to a more reasonable level.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

You were (hopefully) not as close to the particular people in this crash so you're post wasn't as emotionally driven as mine. I wrote something in the heat of the moment and didn't fully think it through.

Welcome to the world of the parents. This is why people sue.

No apologies need.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[normiss 893]

I never understood why there was ANY damages in the McDonalds (ptui) case. Why are corporations responsible for the stupidity of the general populace?

I mean it was HOT COFFEE for Christ's sake!
WHO would have thought it would BE HOT????

what happend to the natural thinning of the herd?

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

I never understood why there was ANY damages in the McDonalds (ptui) case. Why are corporations responsible for the stupidity of the general populace?

The jury found her 20 percent responsible. The issue is not that cut and dry.

Coffee is hot and will burn you. This is true. The coffe you brew at home is 140 degrees. The McDonald's coffee was 180 degrees. Nobody else had coffee hotter than 160.

The point is that if you spill coffee on yourself, you can expect to be burned. Hence, 20 percent responsibility of the Plaintiff. What you don't expect is to face reconstructive surgery from coffee. You expect coffee to be hot enough to cause first degree burns. You don't expect coffee to cause 3rd degree burns.

It was unnecessary and unreasonable to make coffee like lava, and when unreasonable conduct causes injury, the law finds that there is a problem. Had the coffee been 140, 150, maybe even 160 degrees, no problem. 180???? That was bad..

I'm just explaining it. Don't flame me...

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[waltappel 1]

Initially I had the same reaction as a lot of people, including Normiss. That changed when I read news reports that McDonalds had consciously made a business decision on the coffee temperature after considering the potential for lawsuits. They had concluded that either the savings or profit resulting from the high coffee temperature would offset any judgements or settlements they would have to pay resulting from burned consumers of that coffee.

As you pointed out, there is a general expectation of coffee temperature that is considered normal and/or reasonable. McDonalds exceeded that temperature *after* considering the possibility of injury to consumers.

The lawsuit really wasn't as frivolous as it appeared on the surface.

Walt