stratostar 5 #1 January 10, 2012 http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Sky-diving-firm-sued-in-student-s-death-2452138.php Another case of not opening a parachute before impact is going to cost Mr. Boyd time & legal fees to defend the waver. I'm pretty sure he will win in the long run. One interesting note in the story is they (family & lawyer) are blaming an instructor as well for failing the student by not "saving him"..... Best of luck guys, sorry to see this story.you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #2 January 10, 2012 Original Incident Thread Just for context."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #3 January 10, 2012 This is the only case I can think of a suit actually making it to trial... Are there other recent examples that I'm missing? _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CSpenceFLY 1 #4 January 10, 2012 For fuck sake, It wasn't even his first jump. I hope the family goes broke and Steve counter sues. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rwieder 0 #5 January 10, 2012 +1-Richard- "You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
obelixtim 100 #6 January 10, 2012 The fact that the AFFI went below his hard deck till his own AAD fired should blow the argument they are making that the Instructor did nothing to save him. Or are they arguing that there was some negligence on the part of the Instructor somewhere earkier on the jump.....My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davelepka 4 #7 January 10, 2012 QuoteFor fuck sake, It wasn't even his first jump. I hope the family goes broke and Steve counter sues I don't know how these things make it to trial. The student hade made 5 previous solo jumps, and before each jump (I assume) he was told over and over that opening his parachute on time was extremely important, and then he (I assume) proceeded to do so. If he did not, he would not have been passed to the next level. On the jump in question, he was again told that he would be opening his own parachute The dive flow which included both him tracking away from the instructor and opening his own parachute was taught and reviewed (I assume) multiple times, up to and including, in the aircraft minutes before the jump. With all this in mind, the student chose to exit the aircraft, and in doing so, accepted responsilbility for his portion of the planned skydive, to include opening his own parachute. On top of that all, the dive flow was the same one used for every Lv 6 student at this DZ, and is in accordance with the USPA trainging program they are following. What part of this is negligence, and what part of this is 'skydiving is dangerous'? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #8 January 10, 2012 "Gaines West, lead attorney for Williams' family, argued in his opening remarks that the company's instructor, Alex O'Connor, should have intervened to help Williams deploy his parachute. Judge Ed Denman did not allow video or audio evidence during opening statements Monday and had not decided whether he would admit that evidence during trial." Well that kind of blows away anyone who argued that Instructors need not concern themselves with being sued. I don't understand why the judge is even considering dis-allowing video evidence. Hmmmmm. I wonder does the Instructor have his own lawyer or is he tagged in with the DZ's lawyer?My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AdamWirtz2001 0 #9 January 10, 2012 I read through the original incident thread and couldn't find much on the cause of his death. Did his AAD fail? Double Mal? If his AAD was not on or failed or was out of maintenance, I would argue there is some negligence on the part of his instructors and the DZ. If I was this guys attorney I would argue that the DZ has a duty to ensure that their student equipment is safe. If the equipment was not the problem, then I would think the waiver would hold up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #10 January 10, 2012 QuoteThis is the only case I can think of a suit actually making it to trial... Are there other recent examples that I'm missing? _Am Does this one fit the bill? http://blogs.esanjoaquin.com/lodi/2010/01/29/a-jurors-perspective-in-lodi-area-skydiving-trial/My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #11 January 10, 2012 QuoteI read through the original incident thread and couldn't find much on the cause of his death. Did his AAD fail? Double Mal? If his AAD was not on or failed or was out of maintenance, I would argue there is some negligence on the part of his instructors and the DZ. If I was this guys attorney I would argue that the DZ has a duty to ensure that their student equipment is safe. If the equipment was not the problem, then I would think the waiver would hold up. Incident thread indicated the AAD fired ane the canopy came out but was partially entangled with the jumper (who was spinning on his back). At least that's what I made of it. Cause of death was blunt force trauma."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
obelixtim 100 #12 January 10, 2012 Quote I don't understand why the judge is even considering dis-allowing video evidence. Hmmmmm. If it shows a real time view of the events, I can't see how he can NOT allow the video to be used. If he doesn't and the DZ loses the case, surely that would be grounds for an appeal...My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grimmie 173 #13 January 10, 2012 Quote"Gaines West, lead attorney for Williams' family, argued in his opening remarks that the company's instructor, Alex O'Connor, should have intervened to help Williams deploy his parachute. Judge Ed Denman did not allow video or audio evidence during opening statements Monday and had not decided whether he would admit that evidence during trial." Well that kind of blows away anyone who argued that Instructors need not concern themselves with being sued. I don't understand why the judge is even considering dis-allowing video evidence. Hmmmmm. I wonder does the Instructor have his own lawyer or is he tagged in with the DZ's lawyer? The video has probably not been authenticated for use as evidence. The court would have to look at it and have expert witnesses testify that this was in fact the video, has not been altered and has been kept safe since the incident from tampering in a chain of evidence type way. A lawsuit against a drop zone is not a surprising thing at all. Look at the skydivers here that put an incidents thread all over the map. It was the gear, the training, the AAD, the pilot, the instructor, the RSL, the rigger, the...blah, blah, blah... Now look at a family that knows nothing of skydiving. A loved one dies and everyone from Grandma to their mailman says..."You should sue them". So now the lawyer does a shotgun approach and sues everyone involved, hoping for a ruling in the family's favor. No matter how many pages a waiver is. No matter how safe and well run a drop zone is. No matter what steps are taken to prevent a death or injury, lawsuits can still be brought to court. The waiver and the drop zone's operations will probably hold up unless there is a case of true negligence. The drop zone owner will have to spend THOUSANDS of dollars to defend the business. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #14 January 10, 2012 Quote No matter how many pages a waiver is. No matter how safe and well run a drop zone is. No matter what steps are taken to prevent a death or injury, lawsuits can still be brought to court. The waiver and the drop zone's operations will probably hold up unless there is a case of true negligence. The drop zone owner will have to spend THOUSANDS of dollars to defend the business. Yes. It's the 'Merican way. I didn't think about the authentication angle. Not a lawyer (I have enough enemies already...)My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yoink 321 #15 January 10, 2012 Lawyers should be fined for every time they sue someone which doesn't make it to a certain stage of the process. There has to be some way to get away from the 'SUE EVERYONE!' mentality. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grimmie 173 #16 January 10, 2012 If a town is too small for one lawyer, two lawyers will thrive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joephus 0 #17 January 10, 2012 QuoteThe drop zone owner will have to spend THOUSANDS of dollars to defend the business. I was talking to my home DZ's lawyer about this not too long ago and she put a section into the waiver that states if the skydiver or anyone acting on their behalf does sue the DZ they are required to pay the attoney's fees for the DZ upfront before the law suit. If there was a law suit she stated she would start billing the person in question directly since they agreed to it before jumping. Not sure exactly how this would play out in court but thought it was an interesting addendum. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likestojump 3 #18 January 10, 2012 QuoteLawyers should be fined for every time they sue someone which doesn't make it to a certain stage of the process. There has to be some way to get away from the 'SUE EVERYONE!' mentality. And Texas actually did do something about it ! re : http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/268436/loser-pays-texas-small-business-wins-stephen-demaura Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #19 January 10, 2012 QuoteLawyers should be fined for every time they sue someone which doesn't make it to a certain stage of the process. There has to be some way to get away from the 'SUE EVERYONE!' mentality. Looser pays laws take care of this The lawyers lobby continually fights this type of law"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jacketsdb23 45 #20 January 10, 2012 Quote If his AAD was not on or failed or was out of maintenance, I would argue there is some negligence on the part of his instructors and the DZ. So if an AAD failed, you would want to sue the instructor? What part of "this is a back up device only. It can, and has failed" do you not understand?Losers make excuses, Winners make it happen God is Good Beer is Great Swoopers are crazy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
angle228 0 #21 January 10, 2012 FAA regs state that you have to keep AAD's maintained according to manufacturer requirements (right?) So if the AAD was not "airwothy" then this would be neglagence. Yes its a backup device but it the US it must be maintained if its going to be on the reserve systemI am fucking your mom right now Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #22 January 10, 2012 The AAD fired. The reserve came out. It's lines entangled with the jumper. Any talk about the AAD being faulty appears to be wrong, at least according to the incident thread. Be interesting to know what exactly the lawyer is alleging is "gross negligence." That's a pretty high standard. Perhaps it is in his pleadings. From what is reported in the incident thread this does indeed appear to be nothing but a nuisance lawsuit."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 24 #23 January 10, 2012 You and Adam, please don't jump with me. Ever. Thanks.Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #24 January 10, 2012 QuoteYou and Adam, please don't jump with me. Ever. Thanks. +1---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jlmiracle 7 #25 January 10, 2012 QuoteYou and Adam, please don't jump with me. Ever. Thanks. I've made a note and added them to "the list". JBe kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites