OT Court system rant

Was reading in the local paper.

A man a few years ago backed his boat into a swimmer. They saved the swimmers life but she was badly injured, losing part of her leg.

There were 3 trials, the first two were were aquittals, but not unanimous - so the attorneys could refile.
The court found and upeld that Brunswick, the manfacturer of the boats propeller liable for 3.8 million dollars because the propeller did not come with a safety cage, like a fan you would buy for inside your home.

I have a problem with these multiple refilings until you get the result finally. I feel badly for the injured person - but this case is a good example.
Could you sue Bridgestone next if someone runs over your foot?

(quoted from post at 12:04:50 06/16/11) Was reading in the local paper.

A man a few years ago backed his boat into a swimmer. They saved the swimmers life but she was badly injured, losing part of her leg.

There were 3 trials, the first two were were aquittals, but not unanimous - so the attorneys could refile.
The court found and upeld that Brunswick, the manfacturer of the boats propeller liable for 3.8 million dollars because the propeller did not come with a safety cage, like a fan you would buy for inside your home.

I have a problem with these multiple refilings until you get the result finally. I feel badly for the injured person - but this case is a good example.
Could you sue Bridgestone next if someone runs over your foot?

Click to expand...

I, too, am disgusted by stuff like this. How much do you think propellers are going to go up in price because of this new liability. Plus, what do you think the first thing a boater will do when buying a motor & prop with a cage? There'll be lots of cages at the bottom of our lakes.

Obviously, there is information missing from this story.

No court system in the US allows more than one bite of the same apple.

Perhaps the early trials were mistrials or the secondary trial(s) were appeals?

Dean

Yep,that is todays world.
You just keep suing down the line till ye find one to blame that can't fight back and will hick it up.

Local timothee plant Had a new commercial hay shed put up.
Roof collapsed in the first winter(faulty design)The lawyers just passed on down the line
Engineer went free.
Main contractor went free.
The concrete supplier went free.
They blamed it on the contractor that installed the concrete footings, he had failed to verify that the concrete was adequate for the load(it wasn't),yet the pilings where intact.Just the trusses had collapsed

English law should be the law of the land - As I understand if I sue you and lose I pick up all the tab.

JG has the facts right. I'd note that the guy suing has a number of expert witnesses who designed propeller guards. Obviously, these companies want this judgment to stand because then every boat sold would need to buy their product.

An appeal has been filed in US District Court, so it isn't over.
Brochtrup vs. Mercury Marine

That said though,I just was in town and talked to a guy out east of town who's house burned last week. He said it started in the refrigerator,of all places. He said it was only the second time that anybody has known it to happen,but he said there is a heat shield that malfinctions on the evaporator then the insulation starts to melt and it burns inside the jacket til the whole inside melts down.
Now,if I had one of those particular refrigerators in my house and it burned the place to the ground,I'd for darned sure hope somebody went back on the manufacturer for that one.

Bingo.

A hung jury is not a decision, "acquittal" or otherwise. The plaintiff is entitled to a single decision at the trial court level.

Dean

(quoted from post at 10:22:41 06/16/11) That said though,I just was in town and talked to a guy out east of town who's house burned last week. He said it started in the refrigerator,of all places. He said it was only the second time that anybody has known it to happen,but he said there is a heat shield that malfinctions on the evaporator then the insulation starts to melt and it burns inside the jacket til the whole inside melts down.
Now,if I had one of those particular refrigerators in my house and it burned the place to the ground,I'd for darned sure hope somebody went back on the manufacturer for that one.

Click to expand...

In a case like that the insurance company would make good the loss and then they would sue the manaufacturer of the appliance. Only time the home owner would have to get into that would be if they were under insured ot if there was an injury involved.

Kinda like no fault insurance for yer car. You get rear ended. Your insurance company pays you, thiers pays them. After all that is settled your insurance would go after the others guys insurance company.

Rick

That is ridiculous! The guy himself is about 10% to blame and the other 90% of the blame is on the driver of the boat for not paying attention and backing up!!! The guy(his lawyer) probably didn't want to sue his friend who was driving and figured he'd get more money from the big companies. It's no different than if someone backs over someone in a car. Like someone else said, do you sue Bridgestone? The biggest problem with the court system is the judges allow the ambulance chasers to flourish. That's why they can afford to pay for all their TV adds and double full page adds in the yellow pages! The guy was doing something potentially dangerous and got a serious injury. He should be lucky he wasn't killed. If he had been injured while wake boarding, would he be suing as well? Utter nonsense. Good thing at least someone in the previous juries had common sense. The court system needs to stop the insanity!

Trouble is the person with the best set of lawyers wins most of the time regardless if they are in the right or the wrong. The ambulance chasers and class-action clowns already figure their fees based on at least 30 percent of their cases will go against them and hence no award.
It would be better to cap the amount lawyers can collect as fees. Perhaps a small percentage beyond demonstrated costs pertinent to the case.

The driver of the boat did not have as much money as Mercury Marine (the rule of deep pockets).

Oh it is terrible. But I have a news flash for 'yall. Those cases are not decided by lawyers. They are not even decided by Judges! Yes it is true. They are decided by all you folks. US Citizens who serve on Juries.I always get a kick out of all the blame placed on lawyers , on the Judges and on the system. At the end of the day it is the twelve tried and true who render the verdict.As for the so called loser pays attorneys fees rule , it looks great on paper. Until some Corporate behemoth runs right though your property or kills your family member. Sorry no recourse for you now as you will never be able to pay Giant Company's attorneys fees if you should so happen to lose. It's not so bad though. You'll eventually get over the loss of your twelve year old daughter in a few years and we won't have all these frivelous lawsuits tying up American industry. I think it may be a little more complicated than dishing out blame on lawyers and Judges.

Not perzactly. I got rear ended in NYC (a "no-fault" state) by a limousine driver who looked like he'd been riding a camel the week before. The whole thing was settled by the court deciding that I was 40% at fault for just "being there". They (USAA) paid me 60%. My love/hate relationship with USAA continues. As Winston Churchill might have said: "USAA is the worst insurance companty in the world, except for all the others". (;>))