People are going Sue-crazy!!!

[TheMarshMan1 0]

First Sept. 11th Lawsuit Filed
OK, maybe I'm an insensitive prick, but I'm pretty sure this is a big crock o' shit. The suit alleges that the wife of this guy "survived the initial impact." Yeah right. I can't believe what this article is saying.....I can't imagine they will win, cause if they do, then every single family of every single vicitim is gonna be getting in line to sue the shit outta someone. I find this utterly rediculous. What do you all think?
(I truley mean no offense to the families and friends of the victims by posting this...)
"If I could be like that, I would give anything, just to live one day, in those shoes..."

[AndyMan 7]

I think that people have been complaining about lax security at Logan for decades. I also think that if I lost my spouse, I'd want some kind of retribution from the people that allowed it to happen.
If it'd been the case that terrorists managed to hijack a plane from Charles-de-Gaules, or an El-Al plane, then I'd be more critical of the lawsuit. There are airports and airplanes in the world that take security seriously. America still doesn't and maybe a lawsuit will help them change.
Most people can't sue, because they took the compensation package. This woman's family wasn't eligible for the package because she was too afluent.
So they haven't gotten any compansation, they probably didn't get any aid, and they've got the right to sue. It's a pretty small list of people in this situation.
All the power to them, I say.
_Am
ICQ: 5578907
MSN Messenger: andrewdmetcalfe at hotmail dot com
AIM: andrewdmetcalfe
Yahoo IM: ametcalf_1999

[rgoper 0]

let's please NOT forget the infamous last page we sign, BEFORE we sky dive. i think it's wrong to sue a d.z. or anyone else for a tragic accident. i've told my wife, if i die sky diving, road biking, mountain biking, or driving my 1/4 mile machine, tell everybody that i died doing what i love.
Think Before You Indulge:
Richard
"Man, I've Just Thought I'd Just Thought I'd Seen It All!"

[TheMarshMan1 0]

AndyMan...I see your point, but $50 million?! ....and if she already had "substancial life insurance policies"?! I think they're trying to fill their wallet, and for all the wrong reasons. Just my .02
"If I could be like that, I would give anything, just to live one day, in those shoes..."

[Cornholio 0]

It actually makes sense to me. The victims compensation fund was designed for families that did not have the type of coverage that this guy had on his wife. True, they were probably loaded to the gills with money and he is suing on behalf of lost income that she would provide. The VCF was created to keep people from suing because chances are, they would be getting compensated for more than they would sue for, or about equal. However, this woman was worth a lot more than the VCF would pay out.
Personally, I would probably be doing the same thing if I felt that the VCF was not covering what was/would be lost.
And no, I don't think you're insensitive, but maybe try looking at it from a victim's point of view. Victim meaning those that were left behind.
__________________________________________
If first you don't succeed....skydiving is not for you.

[billvon 3,116]

>So they haven't gotten any compansation, they probably didn't get any aid, and
>they've got the right to sue.
Of course they do. Heck, perhaps they could sue the US military for not shooting the plane out of the sky, or the president for taking too lax a position on terrorism. They could sue the designers of the twin towers for not designing them better, or the families of the aircraft's crew for not fighting back - after all, passengers on another aircraft showed it was possible. (Of course, the people who actually caused it are too hard to sue, but fortunately these alternatives are available.)
Good thing he didn't die in a bear attack. There might be no one to sue! Then where would justice be found?
-bill von

[skymedic 0]

I am SOOOOOO tired of people wanting free money...especialy when you are alreayd covered by insurance policies....if they took everything you had fine...but this persone doesn't seem to need the extra cash...typical american capitalism..and Lawyers(thats right you terri) are the cause of this stuff...and also people who want to make easy money....
stupid shit...
Cheers....vasbyt
marc
"I have no fear of falling, I just hate hitting the ground"-The Badlees...

[Zennie 0]

Quote

let's please NOT forget the infamous last page we sign

Last page? Hell it's on every page...
You might possibly die skydiving.
You're jumping out of an airplane. You're falling really, really fast. Parachutes occasionally malfunction. You might die.
Oh, for the record, hitting that ground at 100+ MPH might kill you.
Did we mention you might die skydiving?
Now watch this video entitled "You Might Die Skydiving (But Probably Won't)"
Reason #867 why I got out of lawyering.
"Zero Tolerance: the politically correct term for zero thought, zero common sense."

[lazerq3 0]

Yup I think its a crock O sh$t too..... I glad this person thinks his wife was more important the all the others who dies that day...I mean come on...."I'm sueing you becuase my wife was worth more than you can give me......" I'm sorry and this may sound rude but your wife's life was not any more valuable than the other 1000's of people that died that day!!!
jason

[ChromeBoy 0]

Quote

Good thing he didn't die in a bear attack. There might be no one to sue! Then where would justice be found?

They could always sue the bear. The bears catch a lot of salmon which could earn money. They would have to inform the bear before it hibernates though.

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

shooting the plane out of the sky, or the president for taking too lax a position on terrorism. They could sue the designers of the twin towers for not designing them better

So you don't think they should've fireproofed the top 30 floors?
_Am
ICQ: 5578907
MSN Messenger: andrewdmetcalfe at hotmail dot com
AIM: andrewdmetcalfe
Yahoo IM: ametcalf_1999

[billvon 3,116]

>So you don't think they should've fireproofed the top 30 floors?
And provided emergency escape BASE rigs! After all, they are available, and those people would be alive today if BASE manufacturers weren't so greedy that they were actually charging _money_ for those rigs - think about how many deaths were caused by their self-serving greed. I think that family might have someone else to sue!
-bill von

[GroundZero 0]

Geez-us!
Here's my take on a lawsuit I was involved with... (this may be a long story, so grab a beer then continue reading...)
....
...
Good, you grabbed a cold one from the back of the fridge!
A skydiving related lawsuit... (plane crash-no jumping involved)... occurred a few years ago. After reaching an altitude of a few (maybe hundred) feet, the twin lost one engine, continued south until a vmc roll into trees. As the plane rolled through the trees, one engine was ripped off, prop and gearbox from the other side was torn away, fuselage was opened entirely...(everyone exited through the side of the opened aluminum... i.e. no need to go out the door.) Result: there must be a God; no fatalities, everyone but 2 walked out of the airplane.
My dear friends who were injured most severely found the resources of our legal system. This is a good thing because the insurance company was not willing to pay anyone for anything... (I like our legal system in the United States!) Lawyers were hired and the story begins.....
The Defendants were being sued for 6-million dollars! In the beginning there were 27 defendants (wrong-doers), but because our legal system assures that the innocent will be proven innocent, only 13 remained at the end.
The process lagged on for more than three years after the crash... (I'm beginning to think that these lawyers are not considering my friends who have been injured...) To speed up the process, all parties agree to something called mediation. This is an imitation version of justice where all parties (and respective lawyers) meet to agree on a settlement. (I'm glad these lawyers are focusing on my injured friends! They must be ok after all!)
By the end of a long day, a settlement was agreed upon.
Victim #1: $155,000 Yehaa! that should help, she was really injured in this mess!
Victim #2: $60,000, I was hoping she'd see more. It was her first jump (to be, first time Tandem student, shit first time airplane flight!)
Because I'm from an engineering background, I felt the need to translate those "small" settlements into real-time money. Shit we started at $6,000,000.00 U.S. money!
Victim #1: Start with $155,000 dollars, pay the laywer one third, net about one hundred thousand dollars! Yeeha! Wait a minute, she had $110,000 in medical bills... her medical insurance company has "subrogation rights". They can be repaid for any collected money. Lucky for Nancy, they agreed to take the ~$100,000 and drop the remaining few thousand. She did not have to pay the balance, she received NOTHING!
Victin #2: $60,000.00... YooHoo! big bucks!!! Same story... one third to her lawyer (ambulance-chasin mutha fu%@er), leaves ~$40,000 for her to enjoy.... WRONG! SUB-RO-GA-TION. Her medical insurance company claimed the balance. Last I heard, she's still trying to correct her credit history for the balance due, (her medical was higher than the balance).
Being the "engineer-type" i am, i decided to probe a bit further. I saw two girls seriously injured, then try to recoup their losses through our "system". I saw huge expenses in the legal side. So I had to ask... and you know what? Every law firm was more than happy to document their "expenses" and charges.
Total billed legal related to this case: ~$2,100,000.00+....
Who won?
Chris
p.s. ever wonder why it cost so much to skydive?

[billvon 3,116]

>My dear friends who were injured most severely found the resources of our legal
> system. This is a good thing because the insurance company was not willing to
>pay anyone for anything...
I'm not sure I understand. Did their medical insurance company refuse to pay even though they had medical plans that covered skydiving? If so, a lawsuit is entirely appropriate, since the insurance company broke the contract they had with the jumpers.
Or did the jumpers sue those people they agreed not to sue in the waiver? If that's the case, I can't see that as a good thing, any more than I can see it being OK for a drunk to run into a highway, get hit by a car - then sue the driver of the car, the bar that served him the alcohol, and the city that maintained the roads. Sure, it's done all the time, but that doesn't make it right.
-bill von

[Remster 30]

Sorry Zen amd Richard,
But what the heck does the skydiving waivers have to do with this lawsuit? This is someone suing Americain Airlines for one of the Sept 11 crash....
Remster
Muff 914

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

But what the heck does the skydiving waivers have to do with this lawsuit? This is someone suing Americain Airlines for one of the Sept 11 crash....

It has to do with personal responsibility and not blaming others when something bad happens to you. In skydiving, they actually put that in print because they can't rely on people to do the right thing in this litigitous society.
It's horrible when bad things happen to people, but the airlines were providing a service, that being a flight. That's what they were paying for. If the airline said your fee is to cover the expense we have to go through to stop a world wide suicide terrorist organization from killing you, then there might be an issue. But they were paying for a flight, with a reasonable expectation of safety. What happened was planned for years by people determined to succeed no matter what. They are to blame, not the airlines.
Could the airlines have done a better job with security? Sure. Is that what they're in business to do? No, they provide flights. If you want an extra level of security, hire a private charter and your own security force. Otherwise don't blame others for a tragic situation that they did not wish on you and I'm sure sincerely regret happened.
cielos azules y cerveza fría
-Kevin

[GroundZero 0]

Bill,
oops, maybe that was a bit confusing... The girls both had medical insurance which allowed them to be treated by hospitals, doctors, therapists, etc... The airplane insurance refused to pay for anything..(seems that the quick thinking insurance rep, found a far violation... you'll appreciate this, being a pilot... the pilot/owner had performed oil changes -allowed - and logbook entries were correct, except the signatures only stated "pilot/owner" without certificate number. And this alone made the aircraft "unairworthy"... no payments to anyone from the aircraft insurance company.)
Their medical insurance did not exclude skydiving, so they were covered. After the expensive legal battle, they collected the settlement money from the defendents. Their lawyers took their share and their medical insurance companies had subrogation rights, thus claiming the portion they had paid, leaving the girls nothing after the 3+ year legal battle.
Just ain't right for any involved... and yes they did sign waivers, one was a first time jumper and the other was an experienced jumper (with a brother-in-law/lawyer who started everything)... the defendents lawyers never produced the waivers or motioned to dismiss because of them. They wanted to save their "ace-in-the-hole". (And continue to rack up years of billable hours!)
My blood's boiling just thinkin about it!
Chris

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

>So you don't think they should've fireproofed the top 30 floors?
And provided emergency escape BASE rigs!

You really dont't think there's a diference? C'mon. Fireproofing is a standard building technique that they skipped on the top floors because they were too cheap.
You don't think there's a significant difference between building it the way it was designed and base rigs?
_Am
ICQ: 5578907
MSN Messenger: andrewdmetcalfe at hotmail dot com
AIM: andrewdmetcalfe
Yahoo IM: ametcalf_1999

[Zennie 0]

Quote

But what the heck does the skydiving waivers have to do with this lawsuit?

Nothing, other than the fact that it's more lawsuit insanity.
And as far as lawsuits go, if there's anybody to blame in this whole mess, it's our own Federal Government. Get this...
When the WTC was first being built, the design called for an asbestos resin to be applied to the structural steel. Roughly half of Tower 1 and about the first 7 floors of Tower 2 had this resin. The resin was designed to prevent the very thing from happening that caused the WTC to collapse .. structural failure from the heat of a fire.
So why didn't they apply the resin all the way up? Well, you can thank the good 'ol EPA for that. They declared all asbestos evil and banned it from being applied in any form... even the harmless form such as the resin .. to new structures.
So planes crash, no protective resin, heat causes structural change in steel. WTC collapses. Thousands die. How many would have died from asbestos inhalation from the application of the resin? None.
Thanks EPA!
"Zero Tolerance: the politically correct term for zero thought, zero common sense."

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

So why didn't they apply the resin all the way up? Well, you can thank the good 'ol EPA for that. They declared all asbestos evil and banned it from being applied in any form... even the harmless form such as the resin .. to new structures.

Fireproofing is still standard practice, they just changed the materials they use. Why the WTC wasn't fireproofed with other materials is beyond my comprehension.
_Am
ICQ: 5578907
MSN Messenger: andrewdmetcalfe at hotmail dot com
AIM: andrewdmetcalfe
Yahoo IM: ametcalf_1999

[billvon 3,116]

I'm afraid I'm still a little confused.
>The girls both had medical insurance which allowed them to be treated by
>hospitals, doctors, therapists, etc...
So that sounds like a good outcome. Their medical costs were covered, which is a very good result.
>The airplane insurance refused to pay for anything..
Why would anyone expect the airplane insurance to pay for anything beyond loss of the aircraft? Did you mean that they should have paid the women as well, despite their waivers?
>Just ain't right for any involved... and yes they did sign waivers, one was a first
>time jumper and the other was an experienced jumper (with a brother-in-
>law/lawyer who started everything)... the defendents lawyers never produced the
> waivers or motioned to dismiss because of them. They wanted to save their "ace-
>in-the-hole". (And continue to rack up years of billable hours!)
>My blood's boiling just thinkin about it!
As bad as lawyers can be, they cannot put their names on the lawsuit. Greedy people, not greedy lawyers, sue other people.
-bill von

[TequilaGirl 0]

People need to start blaming the individuals who bring the lawsuits - not the attorneys who prosecute or defend them. Everyone is entitled to fair representation........which ever side of the fence you are sitting on.

[Zennie 0]

Quote

People need to start blaming the individuals who bring the lawsuits - not the attorneys who prosecute or defend them.

But would you agree that a lot of times people are goaded on by the advertising they see on TV from the career plaintiff's attorneys.
There is a huge glut of attorneys out there. Most of them wind up hanging a shingle, not working for a major law firm. In order to pay the bills they'll take anything that walks in the door. Plus they know full well that a lot of times all they need to do is file the suit, allege "negligence" (which can be almost anything) and many defendants will pony up a settlement just to make them go away -- because it's cheaper to settle than to defend.
The plaintiff will say "sure, what the heck, file it", because the fee is contingent. Neither the plaintiff nor the plaintiff's attorney has anything lose and a ton of money to gain.
Legalized extortion. Gotta love it.
"Zero Tolerance: the politically correct term for zero thought, zero common sense."

[TequilaGirl 0]

Zennie I agree with you in part - but as you said - it is the Plaintiff who agrees to file the suit.......the attorney must have the approval of the individual.

[billvon 3,116]

>Legalized extortion. Gotta love it.
No more wrong than cigarette, beer or gun ads. There's nothing wrong with advertising something legal, as long as people have a choice to do it or not.
-bill von