Convicted drunk driver sues 14 yo victim's family

[Granny]

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." No matter what interpretation twist is put on this quote from Shakespeare's "Henry VI," there is truth in it.

Not that lawyers should be literally killed, but certainly they should be "figuratively" killed. These are the merchants of greed and the ones who profit most from the greed. Suing has become "the American way." It's not enough to sue (or civilly ask) for medical expenses for some kid who got beaned on the head with a baseball. No. The lawyers have to sue the "negligent" parents of the offending child, the ball club, the referees, the city's parks and recreation department or other owner of the property on which the incident occurred, the makers of the ball, the bat, the mitt, the uniform and all of each of their suppliers and anybody else who can be remotely connected as "contributors" to this incident, not only for the injured child but for any past, present or future child who might just want to play a little game of ball.

This is why our court dockets are filled beyond capacity with frivolous lawsuits putting more serious cases on hold "until." Our criminals have far more rights, care, concern, and pity in the name of humanitarianism than do the victims of their criminals actions. And a person with a record of drunk drive and/or other reckless behavior behind a wheel wants to sue the parents of the dead child??? This guy will be allowed to file his suit, he'll get "free" representation because of his indigent status, and it's we the taxpayers who pay for all these rights and privileges of the bastard.

And I'll say it again: These are the things that drive up costs of the economy straight across the board.

We need serious tort reform.

 

[goldcatt]

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." No matter what interpretation twist is put on this quote from Shakespeare's "Henry VI," there is truth in it.

Not that lawyers should be literally killed, but certainly they should be "figuratively" killed. These are the merchants of greed and the ones who profit most from the greed. Suing has become "the American way." It's not enough to sue (or civilly ask) for medical expenses for some kid who got beaned on the head with a baseball. No. The lawyers have to sue the "negligent" parents of the offending child, the ball club, the referees, the city's parks and recreation department or other owner of the property on which the incident occurred, the makers of the ball, the bat, the mitt, the uniform and all of each of their suppliers and anybody else who can be remotely connected as "contributors" to this incident, not only for the injured child but for any past, present or future child who might just want to play a little game of ball.

This is why our court dockets are filled beyond capacity with frivolous lawsuits putting more serious cases on hold "until." Our criminals have far more rights, care, concern, and pity in the name of humanitarianism than do the victims of their criminals actions. And a person with a record of drunk drive and/or other reckless behavior behind a wheel wants to sue the parents of the dead child??? This guy will be allowed to file his suit, he'll get "free" representation because of his indigent status, and it's we the taxpayers who pay for all these rights and privileges of the bastard.

We need serious tort reform.

This guy doesn't have a lawyer. He dreamed this up all by himself.

If he had a lawyer, I'll bet everything I have the lawyer would be sanctioned for abusing the system and bringing such a frivolous case. As he gets his mess booted out of court.

He probably should be sanctioned and ordered to pay court costs and attorney fees for the victim's family as it is, but if he's indigent to the point of having filing fees waived it's not going to be collected. The fact that a wrongful death suit of this type is being filed for only $15k, the typical minimum liability allowed by law for auto insurance, tells me there's no insurance to cover them either.

So what reforms do you propose to solve a problem for which there is already a solution?

 

[ConHog]

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." No matter what interpretation twist is put on this quote from Shakespeare's "Henry VI," there is truth in it.

Not that lawyers should be literally killed, but certainly they should be "figuratively" killed. These are the merchants of greed and the ones who profit most from the greed. Suing has become "the American way." It's not enough to sue (or civilly ask) for medical expenses for some kid who got beaned on the head with a baseball. No. The lawyers have to sue the "negligent" parents of the offending child, the ball club, the referees, the city's parks and recreation department or other owner of the property on which the incident occurred, the makers of the ball, the bat, the mitt, the uniform and all of each of their suppliers and anybody else who can be remotely connected as "contributors" to this incident, not only for the injured child but for any past, present or future child who might just want to play a little game of ball.

This is why our court dockets are filled beyond capacity with frivolous lawsuits putting more serious cases on hold "until." Our criminals have far more rights, care, concern, and pity in the name of humanitarianism than do the victims of their criminals actions. And a person with a record of drunk drive and/or other reckless behavior behind a wheel wants to sue the parents of the dead child??? This guy will be allowed to file his suit, he'll get "free" representation because of his indigent status, and it's we the taxpayers who pay for all these rights and privileges of the bastard.

We need serious tort reform.

This guy doesn't have a lawyer. He dreamed this up all by himself.

If he had a lawyer, I'll bet everything I have the lawyer would be sanctioned for abusing the system and bringing such a frivolous case. As he gets his mess booted out of court.

He probably should be sanctioned and ordered to pay court costs and attorney fees for the victim's family as it is, but if he's indigent to the point of having filing fees waived it's not going to be collected. The fact that a wrongful death suit of this type is being filed for only $15k, the typical minimum liability allowed by law for auto insurance, tells me there's no insurance to cover them either.

So what reforms do you propose to solve a problem for which there is already a solution?

None of course. It appears some are having problems understanding that the guy is playing jailhouse lawyer, he has no attorney. A public defender wouldn't touch this case, in fact would have no jurisdiction to do so, the state is not obligated to pay for an attorney for a civil case even if one is indignant.

This case will never be tried, and that's all the system can do, even with so called reform a judge would STILL have to rule on this case.

 

[goldcatt]

This guy doesn't have a lawyer. He dreamed this up all by himself.

If he had a lawyer, I'll bet everything I have the lawyer would be sanctioned for abusing the system and bringing such a frivolous case. As he gets his mess booted out of court.

He probably should be sanctioned and ordered to pay court costs and attorney fees for the victim's family as it is, but if he's indigent to the point of having filing fees waived it's not going to be collected. The fact that a wrongful death suit of this type is being filed for only $15k, the typical minimum liability allowed by law for auto insurance, tells me there's no insurance to cover them either.

So what reforms do you propose to solve a problem for which there is already a solution?

None of course. It appears some are having problems understanding that the guy is playing jailhouse lawyer, he has no attorney. A public defender wouldn't touch this case, in fact would have no jurisdiction to do so, the state is not obligated to pay for an attorney for a civil case even if one is indignant.

This case will never be tried, and that's all the system can do, even with so called reform a judge would STILL have to rule on this case.

There's a lot of confusion about these things out there, and a LOT of misinformation.

Criminal =/= Civil. They are two different cases with two different purposes tried in two different courts under two different sets of rules.

I'll agree there are certain areas where reforms are needed, no system designed and run by humans will ever be perfect. But in a case like this, no amount of "reform" is going to change the outcome.

There are already financial penalties for pulling crap like this, the problem here being those penalties probably won't amount to squat because there is nothing to pay them with. There are ethical penalties for attorneys who pull stunts like this, but there is no attorney in this case to slap. No amount of reform is ever going to change the facts, and the problem is already addressed in law.

I simply fail to see what more anyone could ask for.

 

[Luissa]

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." No matter what interpretation twist is put on this quote from Shakespeare's "Henry VI," there is truth in it.

Not that lawyers should be literally killed, but certainly they should be "figuratively" killed. These are the merchants of greed and the ones who profit most from the greed. Suing has become "the American way." It's not enough to sue (or civilly ask) for medical expenses for some kid who got beaned on the head with a baseball. No. The lawyers have to sue the "negligent" parents of the offending child, the ball club, the referees, the city's parks and recreation department or other owner of the property on which the incident occurred, the makers of the ball, the bat, the mitt, the uniform and all of each of their suppliers and anybody else who can be remotely connected as "contributors" to this incident, not only for the injured child but for any past, present or future child who might just want to play a little game of ball.

This is why our court dockets are filled beyond capacity with frivolous lawsuits putting more serious cases on hold "until." Our criminals have far more rights, care, concern, and pity in the name of humanitarianism than do the victims of their criminals actions. And a person with a record of drunk drive and/or other reckless behavior behind a wheel wants to sue the parents of the dead child??? This guy will be allowed to file his suit, he'll get "free" representation because of his indigent status, and it's we the taxpayers who pay for all these rights and privileges of the bastard.

We need serious tort reform.

This guy doesn't have a lawyer. He dreamed this up all by himself.

If he had a lawyer, I'll bet everything I have the lawyer would be sanctioned for abusing the system and bringing such a frivolous case. As he gets his mess booted out of court.

He probably should be sanctioned and ordered to pay court costs and attorney fees for the victim's family as it is, but if he's indigent to the point of having filing fees waived it's not going to be collected. The fact that a wrongful death suit of this type is being filed for only $15k, the typical minimum liability allowed by law for auto insurance, tells me there's no insurance to cover them either.

So what reforms do you propose to solve a problem for which there is already a solution?

I know there is ways to collect money, they might not get very much every month, but I know in my state they can earn money towards these sort of things while in prison. My brother would get $10 checks while the guy who shot him was in prison, now he get $44 now that he is out. I also know that any time a family member or friend puts money on your "books" they can take the money for that sort of thing, or to pay child support. It will be a slow pay out of these people, but the man should cover their costs.

 

[goldcatt]

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." No matter what interpretation twist is put on this quote from Shakespeare's "Henry VI," there is truth in it.

Not that lawyers should be literally killed, but certainly they should be "figuratively" killed. These are the merchants of greed and the ones who profit most from the greed. Suing has become "the American way." It's not enough to sue (or civilly ask) for medical expenses for some kid who got beaned on the head with a baseball. No. The lawyers have to sue the "negligent" parents of the offending child, the ball club, the referees, the city's parks and recreation department or other owner of the property on which the incident occurred, the makers of the ball, the bat, the mitt, the uniform and all of each of their suppliers and anybody else who can be remotely connected as "contributors" to this incident, not only for the injured child but for any past, present or future child who might just want to play a little game of ball.

This is why our court dockets are filled beyond capacity with frivolous lawsuits putting more serious cases on hold "until." Our criminals have far more rights, care, concern, and pity in the name of humanitarianism than do the victims of their criminals actions. And a person with a record of drunk drive and/or other reckless behavior behind a wheel wants to sue the parents of the dead child??? This guy will be allowed to file his suit, he'll get "free" representation because of his indigent status, and it's we the taxpayers who pay for all these rights and privileges of the bastard.

We need serious tort reform.

This guy doesn't have a lawyer. He dreamed this up all by himself.

If he had a lawyer, I'll bet everything I have the lawyer would be sanctioned for abusing the system and bringing such a frivolous case. As he gets his mess booted out of court.

He probably should be sanctioned and ordered to pay court costs and attorney fees for the victim's family as it is, but if he's indigent to the point of having filing fees waived it's not going to be collected. The fact that a wrongful death suit of this type is being filed for only $15k, the typical minimum liability allowed by law for auto insurance, tells me there's no insurance to cover them either.

So what reforms do you propose to solve a problem for which there is already a solution?

I know there is ways to collect money, they might not get very much every month, but I know in my state they can earn money towards these sort of things while in prison. My brother would get $10 checks while the guy who shot him was in prison, now he get $44 now that he is out. I also know that any time a family member or friend puts money on your "books" they can take the money for that sort of thing, or to pay child support. It will be a slow pay out of these people, but the man should cover their costs.

I'm not up on CT practices on that. It's possible, but as you say will be extremely slow.

The thing I go back to is the fact that he is considered indigent enough to waive court filing fees, which everywhere I've been means he has nothing - it's not automatic even when a person is in prison without income. That, and the amount of damages requested in the case. Wrongful death is usually far more than $15k because of the way the value of a life is calculated (Kind of awful to think about, but there is a pretty standard equation).

Which means there's nothing, nada, zip as far as assets and the family is relying on a minimal insurance policy to recoup their legal fees and probably enough to cover funeral expenses.

Ten bucks a week or a month is what it is, but the family will still have to pay the fees and costs out now and wait to be reimbursed over years and years of tiny little chunks. That isn't really fair, or what the court has in mind when it awards costs, fees and/or sanctions.

EDIT: Let me put it this way. I'm all for the sanctions and they should be levied. But if the family was my clients I'd tell them I'll ask for them, I'll get them, but don't plan on them actually doing you any good.

 

[Luissa]

This guy doesn't have a lawyer. He dreamed this up all by himself.

If he had a lawyer, I'll bet everything I have the lawyer would be sanctioned for abusing the system and bringing such a frivolous case. As he gets his mess booted out of court.

He probably should be sanctioned and ordered to pay court costs and attorney fees for the victim's family as it is, but if he's indigent to the point of having filing fees waived it's not going to be collected. The fact that a wrongful death suit of this type is being filed for only $15k, the typical minimum liability allowed by law for auto insurance, tells me there's no insurance to cover them either.

So what reforms do you propose to solve a problem for which there is already a solution?

I know there is ways to collect money, they might not get very much every month, but I know in my state they can earn money towards these sort of things while in prison. My brother would get $10 checks while the guy who shot him was in prison, now he get $44 now that he is out. I also know that any time a family member or friend puts money on your "books" they can take the money for that sort of thing, or to pay child support. It will be a slow pay out of these people, but the man should cover their costs.

I'm not up on CT practices on that. It's possible, but as you say will be extremely slow.

The thing I go back to is the fact that he is considered indigent enough to waive court filing fees, which everywhere I've been means he has nothing - it's not automatic even when a person is in prison without income. That, and the amount of damages requested in the case. Wrongful death is usually far more than $15k because of the way the value of a life is calculated (Kind of awful to think about, but there is a pretty standard equation).

Which means there's nothing, nada, zip as far as assets and the family is relying on a minimal insurance policy to recoup their legal fees and probably enough to cover funeral expenses.

Ten bucks a week or a month is what it is, but the family will still have to pay the fees and costs out now and wait to be reimbursed over years and years of tiny little chunks. That isn't really fair, or what the court has in mind when it awards costs, fees and/or sanctions.

EDIT: Let me put it this way. I'm all for the sanctions and they should be levied. But if the family was my clients I'd tell them I'll ask for them, I'll get them, but don't plan on them actually doing you any good.

If I was the family I would want to get the money awarded just on principle. It might be years before they see any money, but the man should have to pay. My brother was awarded a certain amount, and it is probably no where near being paid off, but the man pays him every month. Well, I should say they take it out of his check, and my brother gets a check from the county. My brother then uses the money to go play poker. LOL
I also think the fact he gets money, has helped him get over it all, not because he gets money but because the man actually does pay him. If that makes sense. LOL

 

[goldcatt]

I know there is ways to collect money, they might not get very much every month, but I know in my state they can earn money towards these sort of things while in prison. My brother would get $10 checks while the guy who shot him was in prison, now he get $44 now that he is out. I also know that any time a family member or friend puts money on your "books" they can take the money for that sort of thing, or to pay child support. It will be a slow pay out of these people, but the man should cover their costs.

I'm not up on CT practices on that. It's possible, but as you say will be extremely slow.

The thing I go back to is the fact that he is considered indigent enough to waive court filing fees, which everywhere I've been means he has nothing - it's not automatic even when a person is in prison without income. That, and the amount of damages requested in the case. Wrongful death is usually far more than $15k because of the way the value of a life is calculated (Kind of awful to think about, but there is a pretty standard equation).

Which means there's nothing, nada, zip as far as assets and the family is relying on a minimal insurance policy to recoup their legal fees and probably enough to cover funeral expenses.

Ten bucks a week or a month is what it is, but the family will still have to pay the fees and costs out now and wait to be reimbursed over years and years of tiny little chunks. That isn't really fair, or what the court has in mind when it awards costs, fees and/or sanctions.

EDIT: Let me put it this way. I'm all for the sanctions and they should be levied. But if the family was my clients I'd tell them I'll ask for them, I'll get them, but don't plan on them actually doing you any good.

If I was the family I would want to get the money awarded just on principle. It might be years before they see any money, but the man should have to pay. My brother was awarded a certain amount, and it is probably no where near being paid off, but the man pays him every month. Well, I should say they take it out of his check, and my brother gets a check from the county. My brother then uses the money to go play poker. LOL
I also think the fact he gets money, has helped him get over it all, not because he gets money but because the man actually does pay him. If that makes sense. LOL

It makes perfect sense. I call it a "moral victory".

But the reality is you have to be as realistic as possible in these situations and realize sometimes a moral victory is all you're going to get. What can I say?

 

[Madeline]

If he had killed my child, the last thing I'd want is an occassional $10 check reminding me of his existence.

I dunno what can or should be done. Goldcatt is right; this claim won't survive a motion to dismiss. But the fact that he filed it and the couple was served with it is an extraordinary injury in and of itself. There's an obscure lawsuit called "abuse of process" that might could fit these facts. But any lawsuit would gain the family nothing, apart from a money judgment they'll never be able to satisfy.

I know if it was me, I'd have certified copies made for every member of the parole board. I'd also make friends with the guards and other prisoners on his cell block and let them know what he had done to my family; bottom line, if revenge is your only goal, there are ways to satisfy it to one degree or another.

 

[George Costanza]

ho insurance will settle this suit out of court...it will not be dismissed...my guess is the suit will be based on a simple stat...80% or so of fatal head injuries on bikes can be prevented by use of a helmet.

people put bike helmets on your kids and yourself....use them when skiing etc...helmets prevent FATAL head injuries

Too bad the child died. I wonder what would have happened if he had been wearing a helmet.

 

[Sallow]

I had a hard time believing this when I heard it on the news.

This is one where the judge should just throw the gavel at the guy..and say, "Get the fuck out of my court room.."

 

[goldcatt]

If he had killed my child, the last thing I'd want is an occassional $10 check reminding me of his existence.

I dunno what can or should be done. Goldcatt is right; this claim won't survive a motion to dismiss. But the fact that he filed it and the couple was served with it is an extraordinary injury in and of itself. There's an obscure lawsuit called "abuse of process" that might could fit these facts. But any lawsuit would gain the family nothing, apart from a money judgment they'll never be able to satisfy.

I know if it was me, I'd have certified copies made for every member of the parole board. I'd also make friends with the guards and other prisoners on his cell block and let them know what he had done to my family; bottom line, if revenge is your only goal, there are ways to satisfy it to one degree or another.

I'd also thought of the constant reminder of that $10 check. But that would be for the family to determine if that's something they wanted or could live with, not the attorney.

I do like the way you think.

But I'm not sure abuse of process would fit here. Remember the clerk who takes the filing isn't qualified to determine whether the complaint has merit, and once it's filed due process kicks in and it has to go through process. I've never actually seen an abuse of process case and correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression it was more about harassment than a single frivolous complaint. That's what Rule 11 is for.

 

[ConHog]

This guy doesn't have a lawyer. He dreamed this up all by himself.

If he had a lawyer, I'll bet everything I have the lawyer would be sanctioned for abusing the system and bringing such a frivolous case. As he gets his mess booted out of court.

He probably should be sanctioned and ordered to pay court costs and attorney fees for the victim's family as it is, but if he's indigent to the point of having filing fees waived it's not going to be collected. The fact that a wrongful death suit of this type is being filed for only $15k, the typical minimum liability allowed by law for auto insurance, tells me there's no insurance to cover them either.

So what reforms do you propose to solve a problem for which there is already a solution?

I know there is ways to collect money, they might not get very much every month, but I know in my state they can earn money towards these sort of things while in prison. My brother would get $10 checks while the guy who shot him was in prison, now he get $44 now that he is out. I also know that any time a family member or friend puts money on your "books" they can take the money for that sort of thing, or to pay child support. It will be a slow pay out of these people, but the man should cover their costs.

I'm not up on CT practices on that. It's possible, but as you say will be extremely slow.

The thing I go back to is the fact that he is considered indigent enough to waive court filing fees, which everywhere I've been means he has nothing - it's not automatic even when a person is in prison without income. That, and the amount of damages requested in the case. Wrongful death is usually far more than $15k because of the way the value of a life is calculated (Kind of awful to think about, but there is a pretty standard equation).

Which means there's nothing, nada, zip as far as assets and the family is relying on a minimal insurance policy to recoup their legal fees and probably enough to cover funeral expenses.

Ten bucks a week or a month is what it is, but the family will still have to pay the fees and costs out now and wait to be reimbursed over years and years of tiny little chunks. That isn't really fair, or what the court has in mind when it awards costs, fees and/or sanctions.

EDIT: Let me put it this way. I'm all for the sanctions and they should be levied. But if the family was my clients I'd tell them I'll ask for them, I'll get them, but don't plan on them actually doing you any good.

Exactly, there are already untold cases of judgments that go unpaid, this would just be another one. And do we REALLY want someone deciding what cases can and can't be heard in front of a Judge?

 

[racescout]

Hey, with logic like that the driver can probably get a job working for the “Good Hands People”.

He could probably claim the boy on the bike (or his family) were “Mayhem”!