rivetgeek 0 #1 August 25, 2009 http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2009/08/skydiver-almost-dies-then-sues-over-broken-fingers.html What a tard.~Bones Knit, blood clots, glory is forever, and chicks dig scars.~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kmfenaughty 0 #2 August 25, 2009 Quotehttp://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2009/08/skydiver-almost-dies-then-sues-over-broken-fingers.html What a tard. Agreed.... makes you want to ask her “What part of NO don’t you understand?” Now ... most Skydiving disclaimers are clear that if you do sue them (and loose) you then become liable for ALL of the legal costs ... I sure hope they are going to pursue this. Anybody have any info ?99% of the people on this earth are sheep ... dare to be different Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pchapman 262 #3 August 25, 2009 A little more detail (and an absurd drawing of 'what happens when a chute gets tangled') is at http://www.newyorkinjurycasesblog.com/2009/08/articles/assumption-of-the-risk-1/thrill-seeking-skydivers-parachute-fails-to-open-instructor-saves-her-she-sues-for-two-broken-fingers/ From the information provided, in general I'm against the woman & her suit, but there's one interesting detail: QuoteLuckily for Lisa, Mr. Rohemo knew exactly what to do during this mid-air free fall. First, he tried to cut the failed main chute off. Failing that, he told Lisa he needed her to stand on his knees and hold on. Lisa's words: "So I am holding as tight as I possibly could standing on his knees as we are falling to our death and I just felt this tremendous pressure pull on my hand ... and I figured we were going to die ...." Rohemo was able to free up the back-up chute, he and Lisa floated down to safety and no one died that day. [...] she lawyered up and sued SkyDive claiming that Rohemo - her savior - had wrongfully told her to hold tight to a dangerous area of the parachute he was trying to cut away and then never told her to let go at an appropriate time. While the description is hard to interpret, that plus the broken fingers thing suggest that whatever the instructor might have asked her to do, she may have reached back to support herself and grabbed the main risers -- which when released broke fingers. (Although I can make some guesses, I'm not sure what exactly the standing on knees or anything similar would have to do with a normal cutaway, so maybe there was something more involved.) Sounds like one of those things that students may unexpectedly do, that can be hard to prevent or even warn against. If an instructor later told the woman it was dumb to have grabbed the risers of the parachute they were jettisoning, she might well say she thought she was grabbing "the harness", something that is usually taught as acceptable. At least the media seems to come down on the side of skydiving in this case. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SethInMI 145 #4 August 25, 2009 Interesting quote from the decision http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2009/2009_06153.htm Quote So much of the waiver and release signed by plaintiff as purports to exempt defendant from its own negligence is void under General Obligations Law § 5-326. Severance of that provision leaves the rest of the contract intact. Sounds like the court is saying, "you can't waive negligence". I know the "you can't waive negligence vs. you can't waive only gross negligence" gets debated on here periodically, and now an appellate court throws in its 2c.It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davelepka 4 #5 August 25, 2009 QuoteWhat a tard. That's being too kind. Aside from the obvious reasons, one of the linked articels revealed that the DZ offered her $5000 to settle on several occasions. Luckily, the greedy bitch declined every time, and six years later she's on the hook for ten times that amount in legal fees, which as per the waiver, the DZ is entitled to, and I pray to god that they persue. Then what they should do is blow the $50k on the worlds biggest boogie, and call it the Lisa Nuttley Affair. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,129 #6 August 25, 2009 Quote blow the $50k on the worlds biggest boogie, and call it the Lisa Nuttley Affair Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davelepka 4 #7 August 25, 2009 I'm willing to bet that a personal injury lawyer latched on to her pro bono looking for some deep pockets. When the DZ offered $5k, the lawyer advised her to decline, as his 30% would only be $1500. In lawyer terms, $1500 is hardly worth getting out of bed for. Meanwhile, the actual injured party would have taken home $3500, which would covered her medical bills if she's uninsured, or her co-pays plus a few grand left over over for her pain if she had insurance. Actually a pretty fair outcome given the circumstance, but thanks to her big money lawyer, she's gets hit with a suit to pay the DZ legal bills. What are the chances the lawyer is going to cover 30% of the judgement? Barring that, what are the chances the lawyer will handle the proceedings regarding the DZs legal fees at no charge? (Hint - I know the answer to both of those questions) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,635 #8 August 25, 2009 While I have been aware of ambulance chasing sleazes for decades, I only recently became aware of web sites such as this one which tell the ambulance chasers where to find the ambulances.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybill 19 #9 August 25, 2009 Hi rg, The '78 SCR Scrambles, Elsinore Ca., Bottom line on the T-shirt, "'Ya pays yer money, and 'ya takes yer chances!!" She may have broke a finger (could've been worse!!) "BUT" she walked away from the landing!! 'Old pilot's sayin',"Any landing that 'ya can walk away from is a 'GOOD ONE'!!!" I'm sure she was thinkin' the line from 'Right Stuff","No Buck$ No Buck Roger$!!"SCR-2034, SCS-680 III%, Deli-out Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MakeItHappen 15 #10 August 25, 2009 QuoteInteresting quote from the decision http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2009/2009_06153.htm Quote So much of the waiver and release signed by plaintiff as purports to exempt defendant from its own negligence is void under General Obligations Law § 5-326. Severance of that provision leaves the rest of the contract intact. Sounds like the court is saying, "you can't waive negligence". I know the "you can't waive negligence vs. you can't waive only gross negligence" gets debated on here periodically, and now an appellate court throws in its 2c. I think you are missing the issues in this case and why the appellate court overruled part of the supreme court's decision. Issue 1 was whether or not a malfunctioned main was part of the assumption of risk. The appellate court said yes it was and that it was obvious by the fact that two parachutes are used. This is why the claim against the defendants was dropped. Issue 2 was that negligent actions cannot be waived by Sec 5-326. But there were no negligent actions by the defendant, as the malfunctioned main was part of a normal expectation of participating in skydiving. The court mentioned in passing that this part of the waiver appears to violate NY state law. Issue 3 was that the plaintiff would be responsible for defendant's legal fees if the ruling went against the plaintiff. Since the plaintiff did not defend those counter-complaints and the discretion of the court, that part of the counter-complaint remains open and not ruled upon by the court. .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #11 August 25, 2009 Quote Issue 3 was that the plaintiff would be responsible for defendant's legal fees if the ruling went against the plaintiff. Since the plaintiff did not defend those counter-complaints and the discretion of the court, that part of the counter-complaint remains open and not ruled upon by the court. Yeah, looks like her ambulance chaser was sloppy. She'll probably sue him for malpractice next. (what is the respectability of the lawyer equilvant of Internal Affairs?) http://www.newyorkinjurycasesblog.com/2009/08/articles/assumption-of-the-risk-1/thrill-seeking-skydivers-parachute-fails-to-open-instructor-saves-her-she-sues-for-two-broken-fingers/ So that's the end of this case, right? Wrong. The waivers that Nutley signed included language that, in a lawsuit such as the one Nutley started here, she'd have to pay SkyDive's attorneys fees and litigation costs. While this type of contractual provision is generally disfavored in New York, Nutley failed to defend against it (her lawyer neglected to serve a so called reply to defendant's counterclaim asserting its right to legal fees and costs) so this issue is still alive. Inside Information: * SkyDive offered $5,000 to settle several times * SkyDive intends to pursue its claim for legal fees and costs which by my estimate could exceed $50,000 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SethInMI 145 #12 August 25, 2009 QuoteI think you are missing the issues in this case and why the appellate court overruled part of the supreme court's decision. ... The court mentioned in passing that this part of the waiver appears to violate NY state law. ... That was a nice summary of the decision, and I agree with all of it. I just wanted to draw attention to that passing statement, that the court said that part of the waiver appeared to violate state law. It had nothing to do with the outcome of this case.It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
surfbum5412 0 #13 August 26, 2009 Quotehttp://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2009/08/skydiver-almost-dies-then-sues-over-broken-fingers.html What a tard. I'd love to get this bitch's number and prank call her all day. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,635 #14 August 26, 2009 QuoteQuotehttp://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2009/08/skydiver-almost-dies-then-sues-over-broken-fingers.html What a tard. I'd love to get this bitch's number and prank call her all day. Which would make you, in your own way, just as bad as she is.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
surfbum5412 0 #15 August 27, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuotehttp://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2009/08/skydiver-almost-dies-then-sues-over-broken-fingers.html What a tard. I'd love to get this bitch's number and prank call her all day. Which would make you, in your own way, just as bad as she is. How so? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
boogiepimp 0 #16 August 27, 2009 I f%*king hate people like that, I hope she shits her pants in a public place. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yoink 321 #17 August 28, 2009 Quote Then what they should do is blow the $50k on the worlds biggest boogie, and call it the Lisa Nuttley Affair. I'd totally travel for that boogie. And I'd make sure plenty of footage of people having an awesome time and not suing each other was taken.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tuna-Salad 0 #18 August 28, 2009 who the fuck do they find to write these ignorant articles? " First-timers always jump "tandem," meaning that they are strapped to an experienced instructor who directs the jump and controls the parachute" Research goes a long way people, but now because it's printed that makes it gospel.Millions of my potential children died on your daughters' face last night. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydived19006 4 #19 August 28, 2009 Quotewho the fuck do they find to write these ignorant articles? " First-timers always jump "tandem," meaning that they are strapped to an experienced instructor who directs the jump and controls the parachute" Research goes a long way people, but now because it's printed that makes it gospel. Off topic, I always offer to proof any article or piece regarding skydiving, or my DZ when contacted. Rarely does the media take me up on this offer (one small town newspaper recently did for an article they wrote on our business. My review and editorial comment corrected what by industry standards could only have been considered ignorant statements). I think that the news folk are a bit lazy or feel the push of a dead line, and figure that news is somewhat like movies. It doesn't matter if all the technical stuff is correct, the general public will not know, and will not care. A fairly large percentage of the population these days think that a tandem skydive is required. On topic; I had a guy threaten to sue me because I refused to give him solo instruction. He was an obvious drug burn out, and I was not about to train him. We did take the threat seriously, but thankfully it never amounted to anything.Experience is what you get when you thought you were going to get something else. AC DZ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,129 #20 August 28, 2009 QuoteA fairly large percentage of the population these days think that a tandem skydive is required.And there's probably a decent number of DZs offering tandems who like that. Frankly, I don't think a tandem is a bad first jump. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydived19006 4 #21 August 28, 2009 Quote Frankly, I don't think a tandem is a bad first jump. Wendy P. I don't think that tandem is a bad choice either, and the vast majority of our first jump students choose tandem. We do a fairly good job making sure that they understand that tandem is not required, at least not by rule, law, or us. Bottom line, I make more money dispatching a load of IAD students from 4,000', but we don't push folk one direction or the other. MartinExperience is what you get when you thought you were going to get something else. AC DZ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tetra316 0 #22 August 28, 2009 QuoteQuoteA fairly large percentage of the population these days think that a tandem skydive is required.And there's probably a decent number of DZs offering tandems who like that. Frankly, I don't think a tandem is a bad first jump. Wendy P. There seems to be more dzs that are indeed requiring a tandem before AFF now. Maybe that was the case at this dz. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #23 August 28, 2009 The ranch uses a tandem progression type of program and transitions to AFF. I think all students make 3 tandems. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #24 August 28, 2009 QuoteThe ranch uses a tandem progression type of program and transitions to AFF. I think all students make 3 tandems. Dave Really?! So every AFF candidate has to pony up $600+ before they can even consider doing their AFF I dive - which is another couple hundred? So they are in for $800 or $900 (or more) by the time they have completed their first AFF dive?" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #25 August 28, 2009 QuoteQuoteThe ranch uses a tandem progression type of program and transitions to AFF. I think all students make 3 tandems. Dave Really?! So every AFF candidate has to pony up $600+ before they can even consider doing their AFF I dive - which is another couple hundred? So they are in for $800 or $900 (or more) by the time they have completed their first AFF dive? Those programs typically have fewer AFF type jumps in the progression before they're cleared for self supervised jumps. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
