man sues Stowe for groovy tripping

[ski_resort_observer]

http://www.timesargus.com/article/20090921/NEWS02/909210334/1003/NEWS02

 

[lloyd braun]

I don't care for "slip and fall" lawsuits but if the mfg or installer did not do the job correctly they should pay.

 

[deadheadskier]

after reading the thread title; not at all what I was expecting to read about :lol:

 

[WWF-VT]

Wonder how that guy did navigating the stairs behind the Mansfield Base Lodge

 

[faceplant]

nasty fall


i wonder who there insurance comp is........hmmmmmmm


:idea:

 

[billski]

I hold no love for ambulance-chasing lawyers. The whole thing looks coached and provoked by the attorney; pretty classic. Handy money for the attorney, perhaps $50K for him for a few hours work...

I lost track of the number of times I have fallen on my keester, got up and got on with life. Mental angush, WTF? Yeah, it hurts like hell, but I never fell into clinical depression either. Hey, circle those big pockets...balls....

 

[bvibert]

after reading the thread title; not at all what I was expecting to read about :lol:

I thought the guy got some bad acid or something...

 

[bigbob]

nasty fall


i wonder who there insurance comp is........hmmmmmmm


:idea:

You mean "Uncle Sam", ie, all of us!

 

[gpetrics]

i always wonder in cases like this whether Plaintiff realizes just how much of a d**k and how whiny he is going to come across as in the court papers, or if people just get caught up in the lawyers promise of big money from a settlement and don't even think twice of how much they're extorting the system....

it hardly sounds like stowe maybe didn't dot their i's and cross their t's with the building of the staircase, but it does NOT sound like they were grossly negligent in this case... it will be a distorition of reality if stowe pays out a boatload of money to this dingler

 

[riverc0il]

When I read the title of the thread, I was getting ready to blast away with my shameless stupid negligent lawsuit commentary. But after reading the article, wow, yikes. How does that type of accident happen on a stairway? That may be legit... and if so, Stowe should pony up ASAP and then go after the contractor.

 

[legalskier]

"With the Plaintiff's right foot position fixed and held by the stair tread, Plaintiff fell forward and downward, forcefully flexing his right knee and rapidly contracting his right quadriceps muscle, resulting in an immediate rupture of Plaintiff's right quadriceps and complete detachment of said tendon and quadriceps muscle from his patella," the lawsuit says.

In other words, the fall caused the victim’s tendon to be ripped off the top of his kneecap. It had to be sutured back on. This would account for the pain and suffering claim. He would have been out of work for weeks if not months; hence the lost wages claim. According to the engineer's report, the victim's fall was caused when the grooves on the stone staircase caught his shoe, due to the improper/negligent installation of said grooves as per the standards in the Dimension Stone Design Manual published by the Marble Institute of America.

A straightforward negligence action which could have happened anywhere.

 

[speden]

I did jury duty in Mass. on a car accident case, and it seems the law does not allow the plaintiff to ask for a specific dollar amount, like $75,000 in this case. The plaintiff wasn't even allowed to submit the cost of their medical bills related to the accident. It was left totally up to the jury to decide how much money to award, and we also had to specify what percent of the blame for the accident was due to the defendant and what percent was due to the plaintiff. I think the amount awarded to the plaintiff is reduced by the percent at fault the plaintiff was in the accident.

I can see why people prefer to settle out of court becuase it's anybody's guess how much or how little the jury is going to award, and who they will blame for the accident. I think it's crazy that they don't give the jury any guidance on what different types of injuries should be worth in terms of compensation. And the jury I was on broke down along gender lines. The women wanted to award a lot more money than the men did. We were able to compromise and get out of there, but the final award amount seemed very arbitrary.

I don't know if Vermont law is different or not from Mass.

 

[vonski]

This should end up coming down on the contractor who did the installation of the stairs. This is a brand new place and manufacturer's instructions seemed not to be followed. It is a no brainer actually. Never will see a trial. Although, we all own some of Stowe these days. It may be unlikely that we also insure them. Most companies don't insure themselves.

 

[marcski]

i always wonder in cases like this whether Plaintiff realizes just how much of a d**k and how whiny he is going to come across as in the court papers, or if people just get caught up in the lawyers promise of big money from a settlement and don't even think twice of how much they're extorting the system....

it hardly sounds like stowe maybe didn't dot their i's and cross their t's with the building of the staircase, but it does NOT sound like they were grossly negligent in this case... it will be a distorition of reality if stowe pays out a boatload of money to this dingler

No one is claiming Stowe was "grossly negligent", just negligent. This is why property owners and contractors have insurance. Insurance companies...(and as someone else posted, most likely its not an AIG company that insures) collect mucho premium $$ for this very purpose. That's why companies' pay for liability insurance....in order to pay for claims made against them.

Not dotting your I's or crossing your T's when it comes to building structures that you know will be open to the public is called negligence. That is what this plaintiff is suing for...Stowe will most likely have an indemnification agreement with the general contractor and/or the sub as part of the construction contract.

 

[HowieT2]

As an "ambulance chasing" lawyer, allow me to correct some misconceptions about this issue.
First of all, different courts and different jurisdictions have different rules so while a complaint in MA state court may not state a dollar amount, the federal court complaint requires a statement as to jurisdiction. In this case the parties must be from different states and in order to bring the case in federal court the amount must be more than 75K which must be affirmatively stated.
Also, the rules for motor vehicle accidents are different than ordinary negligence so the plaintiff may be able to recover medical costs. More likely though is that the plaintiff has to reimburse his health insurance company from any recovery and therefore has to sue for same. Or he has no health insurance and has 50k in medical bills he has to pay.
I understand the concern over the arbitrary nature of jury awards for pain and suffering. What you don't realize because the media never reports this, is that these awards are subject to review by the trial judge and appellate courts which correct verdicts which are out of line. You'd be surprised to know that the juries generally get it right.

This is no ordinary fall on the keester. A ruptured quadricept tendon is a very severe and debilitating injury. You don't get up and walk away. I would venture to say that the victim was out of work for at least 6 months if he worked in an office and more than a year if not.

As for the victim being whiny and a d***k, maybe he's been unable to work and cares more about the family he has to support.

All that being said, the likelihood of success on this claim is small and it is probably only being brought because the injury is so severe. But that is for a jury to decide down the road.

 

[ta&idaho]

I did jury duty in Mass. on a car accident case, and it seems the law does not allow the plaintiff to ask for a specific dollar amount, like $75,000 in this case. The plaintiff wasn't even allowed to submit the cost of their medical bills related to the accident. It was left totally up to the jury to decide how much money to award, and we also had to specify what percent of the blame for the accident was due to the defendant and what percent was due to the plaintiff. I think the amount awarded to the plaintiff is reduced by the percent at fault the plaintiff was in the accident.

I can see why people prefer to settle out of court becuase it's anybody's guess how much or how little the jury is going to award, and who they will blame for the accident. I think it's crazy that they don't give the jury any guidance on what different types of injuries should be worth in terms of compensation. And the jury I was on broke down along gender lines. The women wanted to award a lot more money than the men did. We were able to compromise and get out of there, but the final award amount seemed very arbitrary.

I don't know if Vermont law is different or not from Mass.

The $75,000 number cited in this article is the plaintiff's ticket to federal court. Federal courts can't hear claims based on state law unless the parties are from different states and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.

The experience you had in jury duty probably had more to do with the quirks of the evidence rules as they were applied in the specific case you saw. For example, the parties could have agreed that the plaintiff's medical bills amounted to $XX,XXX. In that instance, the bills probably wouldn't have been relevant any more, and they might have been misleading if you were asked to evaluate the plaintiff's pain and suffering. Jury duty can be frustrating, because a number of decisions reflecting the type of evidence you can see and hear are made by the judge before you enter the courtroom.

I have some sympathy for the plaintiff in this case--this is a SKI SEASON-ENDING INJURY we're talking about...

 

[jaywbigred]

As an "ambulance chasing" lawyer, allow me to correct some misconceptions about this issue.
First of all, different courts and different jurisdictions have different rules so while a complaint in MA state court may not state a dollar amount, the federal court complaint requires a statement as to jurisdiction. In this case the parties must be from different states and in order to bring the case in federal court the amount must be more than 75K which must be affirmatively stated.
Also, the rules for motor vehicle accidents are different than ordinary negligence so the plaintiff may be able to recover medical costs. More likely though is that the plaintiff has to reimburse his health insurance company from any recovery and therefore has to sue for same. Or he has no health insurance and has 50k in medical bills he has to pay.
I understand the concern over the arbitrary nature of jury awards for pain and suffering. What you don't realize because the media never reports this, is that these awards are subject to review by the trial judge and appellate courts which correct verdicts which are out of line. You'd be surprised to know that the juries generally get it right.

This is no ordinary fall on the keester. A ruptured quadricept tendon is a very severe and debilitating injury. You don't get up and walk away. I would venture to say that the victim was out of work for at least 6 months if he worked in an office and more than a year if not.

As for the victim being whiny and a d***k, maybe he's been unable to work and cares more about the family he has to support.

All that being said, the likelihood of success on this claim is small and it is probably only being brought because the injury is so severe. But that is for a jury to decide down the road.

Very good explanation.

If you had to venture a guess as to the benefits of diversity jurisdiction in this case, do you think it has to do with a perception that Vermont courts/juries would be sympathetic to a local ski mountain as against the claims of a Massachusetts resident?

That is interesting regarding his health insurance company's probable requirement that he bring suit. Do you think his attorney is provided for by the said insurance company?

 

[HowieT2]

Very good explanation.

If you had to venture a guess as to the benefits of diversity jurisdiction in this case, do you think it has to do with a perception that Vermont courts/juries would be sympathetic to a local ski mountain as against the claims of a Massachusetts resident?

That is interesting regarding his health insurance company's probable requirement that he bring suit. Do you think his attorney is provided for by the said insurance company?

I didn't mean to imply that the health insurer "requires" that a lawsuit be brought. However, where a claim is brought to recover for damages resulting from personal injury, most, if not all, private health insurance plans have a right of subrogation to recover the amounts paid for medical expenses. The health insurer could bring suit on its own behalf, but in practice they never do, but rely on the victim to do so and piggyback on the efforts of the plaintiff and plaintiffs lawyers. This is true also of medicare and medicaide. They actually have a lien on any recovery to the extent of their medical payments.

I think you are correct as to why a plaintiff would choose federal court in this situation.

 

[speden]

The health insurer could bring suit on its own behalf, but in practice they never do, but rely on the victim to do so and piggyback on the efforts of the plaintiff and plaintiffs lawyers.

With my health insurance they have gotten quite aggressive at trying to recover medical costs from the "guilty" party, even for very minor incidents. Seems like whenever my kids or I see a specialist like an orthopedist, they will send me a letter saying they want to determine if another party was at fault for the injury. Then they want to know when and where the injury occurred. So if one of the kids gets hurt at daycare, I imagine they try to get the medical costs paid by the daycare's insurance coverage. They never report back to me if they recover any money that way, but they must recover something because they seem to put a lot of effort into it.

In the case of the 61 year old slipping on the steps in January, if he had health insurance I bet his insurance company has already tried to recover what it paid for his medical costs directly from Stowe's insurance company.

 

[HowieT2]

With my health insurance they have gotten quite aggressive at trying to recover medical costs from the "guilty" party, even for very minor incidents. Seems like whenever my kids or I see a specialist like an orthopedist, they will send me a letter saying they want to determine if another party was at fault for the injury. Then they want to know when and where the injury occurred. So if one of the kids gets hurt at daycare, I imagine they try to get the medical costs paid by the daycare's insurance coverage. They never report back to me if they recover any money that way, but they must recover something because they seem to put a lot of effort into it.

In the case of the 61 year old slipping on the steps in January, if he had health insurance I bet his insurance company has already tried to recover what it paid for his medical costs directly from Stowe's insurance company.

Trust me when I tell you that the health insurers have not and do not seek reimbursement from third parties themselves. Neither do medicare or medicaide. Those letters (from Meridien, Rawlings and/or Ingenix) are an attempt to find out about a lawsuit and place the recipient on notice of the carriers right to recover the expenses in the suit.
There are valid business reasons for this.