lawsuit question

[Boatowner]

Originally Posted By: LT4 Vette
Costco has VERY deep pockets.

Contact the law office of Goldstein, Feldman and Shapiro.



I would go with Dewey, Cheatum and Howe

 

[Al]

Originally Posted By: LT4 Vette
Costco has VERY deep pockets.

Contact the law office of Goldstein, Feldman and Shapiro.


I prefer Dowe, Screwem, and Howe

Originally Posted By: ryansride2017
Well, after rea Secondly, "P00P" happens. Sometimes you are in the wrong place at the wrong time. I must be getting old as well because it is utterly disappointing to see so many people say "lawyer up". This, my friends, is why we all pay sky high insurance rates. It is sad to see people try to squeeze individuals/companies for every dollar they can get. Once again, I hope your father makes a quick recovery.

Couldn't agree more..I'm 100% with ya'

I had 2 opportunities to Sue in auto accidents and didn't..Both times getting rammed from behind. I t would take something totally major for me to sue.

 

[HTSS_TR]

I got rear-ended some years ago, the Honda Accord was badly damage such that it had to be towed to body shop, the damage was more than $4-5k, my back and neck hurt for several days I had to take some Tylenol everyday to lessen the pain, but I didn't pursuit the bodily injury because I didn't think it was right thing to do. My insurance company kept asking me about the injury every month after the accident, they called the last time about a week before 1 year anniversary of the accident to remind me of the expiration date to claim injury.

The other driver's insurance paid total bill in repairing the car.

 

[01rangerxl]

Good for you guys. If you aren't really hurt that much, no need to pursue it. I've been in a couple rear end collisions as a passenger in the front vehicle and never went after any compensation because I've never been injured. I had one minor rear end collision as a driver, but the guy barely scuffed my trailer hitch while creasing his bumper pretty good, so he already got the [censored] end of that deal and a scuff on my truck doesn't matter.

But we are talking about an already frail cancer patient whose ability to take and heal from these injuries is already compromised. I'm not sure how old the OP's dad is, but injuries that might not seem that bad to most of us can be very serious for an older person in not the greatest health.

 

[Kestas]

It's certainly not your dad's fault that he got hurt. If you're worried about Costco pointing the finger at the hovaround driver, and the driver pointing a finger at someone else, then name them all in the suit. This is called "joint and several liability". This means is that all parties will need to defend themselves, and the judge will ultimately decide where the buck stops and who is at fault.

Your responsibility will be to show damages, starting with medical costs, pain, and suffering.

 

[PR1955]

Nobody said you wouldn't owe them anything. You would "owe them" complete repairs to their vehicle. And I would expect a citation because you did not properly secure the load. And yes, there would be an insurance claim. But should the car owner sue you for some arbitrary amount over and above the damages incurred ? Where does it stop ? And will a monetary reward make the bruises heal faster or better ? Too many lawsuits in my opinion. But, it is just an opinion....

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted By: PR1955
Nobody said you wouldn't owe them anything. You would "owe them" complete repairs to their vehicle. And I would expect a citation because you did not properly secure the load. And yes, there would be an insurance claim. But should the car owner sue you for some arbitrary amount over and above the damages incurred ? Where does it stop ? And will a monetary reward make the bruises heal faster or better ? Too many lawsuits in my opinion. But, it is just an opinion....


A lawsuit doesn't have to be a million dollar stink, though they often are. A reasonable settlement should be enough to make it right, but I doubt Costco is going to volunteer that unless the OP has a lawyer who knows how to deal with these situations. The safeguards in place for the hypothetical example I gave are not there for the OP's dad. To get a response from Costco they will need a lawyer who can speak legalese. I don't think lawsuits in general are a good thing for society, and I think it's ridiculous that people have to pursue compensation in that manner. That's the way the system is set up though, and that's what companies like Costco understand.

And while cash won't heal the bruises, the OP's dad is going to have to visit a doctor, heal up, possibly take medicine, etc. All of that incurs time and money costs for him that I think should be fully compensated.

I agree a line has to be drawn somewhere and there is no doubt that there have been some stupid, frivolous lawsuits. I don't think this is a frivolous case though. This guy should not have been injured while simply trying to pick up his prescriptions, and it was totally avoidable.

 

[rpn453]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
It's funny how some of the BITOG proponents of tort reform are saying "go for gold" in this thread.

 

[bustednutz]

As the OP of this thread I want to thank you all for your input. I had a feeling that this may end up being one of those threads that gets people a little "passionate" about their views and beliefs.
Thank you all for the viewpoints presented.

My family isn't seeking a huge windfall by any means. And I will admit that this is the type of thing that gets my own family passionate and wound up.
We have seeked the advice of an attorney, and are also letting our feelings about all this settle down as well. Calm heads prevail.

Thanks to you all again.

 

[Cutehumor]

Did costco give the old lady another scooter to drive out of there?

 

[Al]

Maybe its time to rethink the scooter thing. Most of the scooters I see being used are people that have allowed them selves to get so fat they can't walk.. ..drives me nuts.

 

[javacontour]

I'm going to say sue for actual damages and name the woman too.

Yeah, you are not going to get any money from her. But if she is unable to operate the scooter, this may be the wake-up call she needs to stop using scooters in the store.

If the scooter was defective, why did she try again?

It's like if my brakes failed, after the crash, would I start the car up and drive again, waiting for another crash? Of course not.

Now will she learn or not? I don't know. But I think it's more likely if she has to face some consequences for her choice to continue to operate the scooter.

So I'd say sue her, just so she gets the message that she fails as a scooter driver.

Perhaps this will save someone from the consequences of her failing as the operator of a motor vehicle.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Al
Maybe its time to rethink the scooter thing. Most of the scooters I see being used are people that have allowed them selves to get so fat they can't walk.. ..drives me nuts.


I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees this. The morbidly obese carting themselves around on these "disability" scooters, with their only true disability being their inability to control what they shove down their throats.

 

[Al]

Originally Posted By: javacontour
and name the woman too. But I think it's more likely if she has to face some consequences for her choice to continue to operate the scooter.

So I'd say sue her, just so she gets the message that she fails as a scooter driver.

Perhaps this will save someone from the consequences of her failing as the operator of a motor vehicle.

I agree completely.

And btw civil judgments are not dis chargeable..so it will hurt her.

I say F... her

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL

I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees this.

Don't worry if there is anything politiclly incorrect..I'm on it.

 

[Mr Nice]

My ambulance chaser lawyer sister would no doubt wheel her injured client into the court room in a wheelchair if they were injured at a big box retail store.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
Originally Posted By: PR1955
I agree. The "victim" should be compensated for any and all medical expenses, but a lawsuit ? I am sure there is some pain and discomfort involved, but it was an ACCIDENT ! Did the woman aim for him ? Why do we always have to find someone to blame and sue ? Unfortunately, accidents happen. I sincerely wish a full and speedy recovery for the "victim", but is suing someone going to help ?


Because often times when a person or organization does something wrong (negligent), they will make every effort to avoid correcting it. If OP's dad says nothing and takes it because it was "just an accident," the potentially faulty scooter will still be in service, the woman who might not be fit to operate such a device will be back on one, and OP's dad will still have bruised legs.


Right, but what is the value of it beyond any doctors bills, prescriptions, therapy, mobility support, etc.? One might say $50 another might say $50k. I dont know, both are likely wrong.

Because it was an accident (doubt the woman was attacking him), I cant see how anything besides the costs incurred would be valid. It would be one thing if she was texting on the scooter, another if it was something beyond everybody's control. Stinks maybe but its part of life. Nobody to sue if you get hit by lightning...

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: Al
Maybe its time to rethink the scooter thing. Most of the scooters I see being used are people that have allowed them selves to get so fat they can't walk.. ..drives me nuts.


+1. But same with handicap parking spots and a lot of other things.

 

[mechanicx]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
Originally Posted By: PR1955
I agree. The "victim" should be compensated for any and all medical expenses, but a lawsuit ? I am sure there is some pain and discomfort involved, but it was an ACCIDENT ! Did the woman aim for him ? Why do we always have to find someone to blame and sue ? Unfortunately, accidents happen. I sincerely wish a full and speedy recovery for the "victim", but is suing someone going to help ?


Because often times when a person or organization does something wrong (negligent), they will make every effort to avoid correcting it. If OP's dad says nothing and takes it because it was "just an accident," the potentially faulty scooter will still be in service, the woman who might not be fit to operate such a device will be back on one, and OP's dad will still have bruised legs.


Right, but what is the value of it beyond any doctors bills, prescriptions, therapy, mobility support, etc.? One might say $50 another might say $50k. I dont know, both are likely wrong.

Because it was an accident (doubt the woman was attacking him), I cant see how anything besides the costs incurred would be valid. It would be one thing if she was texting on the scooter, another if it was something beyond everybody's control. Stinks maybe but its part of life. Nobody to sue if you get hit by lightning...


I think pain in suffering should be worth something but I don't know how much either. If costco was negligent for providing a improperly working scooter, then they should pay more than just medical expenses. They should pay punitive damages. Also even if there is no defect in the scooter, it's not really an accident like an act of nature. It's human error that she could've, should've but didn't avoid commiting. She should be on the hook for that.

I wonder if the women will try to sue costco claiming the scooter had unitended acceleration

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2


Right, but what is the value of it beyond any doctors bills, prescriptions, therapy, mobility support, etc.? One might say $50 another might say $50k. I dont know, both are likely wrong.

Because it was an accident (doubt the woman was attacking him), I cant see how anything besides the costs incurred would be valid. It would be one thing if she was texting on the scooter, another if it was something beyond everybody's control. Stinks maybe but its part of life. Nobody to sue if you get hit by lightning...


That's the tricky part of it. It's hard to put a value on something as vague as pain and suffering.

While I'm sure the woman did not mean to pin anyone with the scooter, if she was unable to operate it safely, then she was creating a potentially dangerous situation by using it in the first place. You can't control a natural event like lightning, but getting on the scooter is a choice.

And if it's found that the scooter had a malfunction, the lady would be off the hook anyway. That would all be on Costco and the scooter manufacturer.

 

[javacontour]

Reminds me of an incident years ago when a scooter operator almost hit my daughter. My daughter was probably 6 or 7. The scooter was coming right at her. She was frozen, and the lady driving panicked. Fortunately I was able to deflect the scooter and then stop it.

That was my best move based on where I was relative to the two.

The lady was extremely apologetic. But sometimes I wonder if it's really such a good idea to have scooters there for folks who may not have the reflexes to respond in such a situation?