Lawsuits involving skydiving injuries/fatalities

[freefall138 0]

Anyone have any ideas on where to look for case law involving skydiving injuries or fatalities? I want to do a case study on it for my business law class, but I am having a hard time finding any cases to work with. Any help would be great.

[SpecialKaye 0]

lexis/nexis...westlaw...findlaw.com

[Tonto 1]

Moved from incidents.

t

It's the year of the Pig.

[Phillbo 11]

I hope you find none. We don't need that in our sport.

[chaoskitty 0]

You'll have more luck finding lawsuits over jump plane accidents.
I feel dirty for even suggesting it though.

[AlexCrowley 0]

I dont really worry about that stuff too much.

We are all participants in a high risk sport. If a company can be held liable for negligence in the case of injury then I'd imagine that someone would have had to do something pretty freaking sloppy to be found guilty.

Legal protections are important - we may all have a common bond and like to think of ourselves as a large extended insular family that takes care of their own, but that doesnt mean that there arent people who care more about $$$$ than safety out there willing to prey on people.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[mr2mk1g 10]

If you're not bothered by jurisdiction or wish to do some kind of comparative study I can provide some from the UK. If you're only interested in US law though they're not likely to be of much use to you.

[Trae 1]

'Anyone have any ideas on where to look for case law involving skydiving injuries or fatalities? I want to do a case study on it for my business law class, but I am having a hard time finding any cases to work with. Any help would be great.'
........................................................

Just because you haven't found any doesn't mean there's a shortage. Many are settled out of court.

Some more mature people pride themselves on rooting out the negligent and irresponsible ones amoungst this blind trusting 'new to the sport' crowd.

Perhaps a few well placed questions in the Skydiving History section could get you a few leads to follow.

Be Righteous NOW.

[tombuch 0]

Try calling USPA and ask for the name of the association attorney. Give him/her a call as an interested law student and see if you can get some pro bono direction for your project.

Tom Buchanan
Instructor Emeritus
Comm Pilot MSEL,G
Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

[IanHarrop 37]

pm sent

"Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy

[rmsmith 1]

Quote

We are all participants in a high risk sport. If a company can be held liable for negligence in the case of injury then I'd imagine that someone would have had to do something pretty freaking sloppy to be found guilty.

Here is an interesting article from Monterey, CA regarding a young lady who passed away while scuba diving. Chances are that she was "brain-dead" anyway, but her family was able to find fault with the "first responders" and more importantly, the pubic entity (deep pockets) who simply hired them. How the lawyers can assign blame to a third party, the public entity, who simply hired a company to fulfill a contract is beyond me. IMHO, the liability trail stops with the employees of the "first responder" company who probably signed a "public trust" agreement.

Diver's family reaches deal in death suit

Ambulance company claims no wrongdoing; parents close to settlement with county
By LARRY PARSONS
Herald Staff Writer

The parents of an Aptos scuba diving instructor who died after a 2002 diving accident in Monterey have settled a wrongful-death lawsuit against ambulance company American Medical Response.

The case, which revealed allegations of heroin use by the ambulance crew that responded to San Carlos Beach to try to save Mollie Suh Yaley, 26, was scheduled to start trial Monday in Monterey County Superior Court.

The county, also a defendant in the case because of its responsibility for emergency medical services, is close to reaching a settlement with William and Arlene Yaley, attorneys said Friday.

Terms of the settlement were confidential. AMR admitted no liability or wrongdoing, which is standard practice in such settlements.

Earlier in the case, a judge ruled that AMR was covered by a state law that limits non-economic damages to $250,000 in medical malpractice cases.

If the case had gone to trial, that amount would have been the highest the Yaleys could have been awarded for their daughter's death. The ruling, which wasn't appealed, was a significant factor in the case, said Brian Evans, the couple's attorney.

Still, the Yaleys are satisfied with the settlement, he said.

"I believe the Yaleys found details of what happened to their daughter. And I think the county and AMR were exposed to the limitations of their operations that were going on," Evans said. "Hopefully they will address them. I'm going to leave it at that."

Yuk Law, an attorney for AMR, said, "We're happy this case is resolved short of trial, and I'm sure the family is too."

The suit accused the county and AMR of negligence. It took an AMR ambulance crew 12 minutes to reach the beach from nearby Pacific Grove, and an AMR paramedic ceased lifesaving efforts after working on Yaley for 22 minutes -- a county protocol that has since been changed.

One of two ambulance crew members, Alfonso Martorella, later told The Monterey County Herald that he and his partner, paramedic Bruce Faucett, used heroin the day Yaley was found unconscious in about 15 feet of water at the popular Cannery Row dive spot.

Faucett denied the allegations, but court documents show he took a leave of absence eight months after Yaley's death to receive treatment for alcohol and drug abuse.

In June, the county hired a new ambulance company, Westmed Ambulance Inc., to take over countywide ambulance services Jan. 1. County officials denied that the reports of drug use by AMR employees affected the decision, but the county insisted on random drug testing for Westmed crews under the new contract.

County Counsel Charles McKee said the county "is close to finalizing a settlement" with the Yaleys.

[HydroGuy 0]

While in 99.99999999% of cases I detest lawsuits...I can see a problem with the first responders both admitedly doing heroin on the job prior to this incident...

Get in - Get off - Get away....repeat as neccessary

[rmsmith 1]

Quote

While in 99.99999999% of cases I detest lawsuits...I can see a problem with the first responders both admitedly doing heroin on the job prior to this incident...

OK, the floater is DEAD. The first person to arrive says, um...she's dead. However, the first person to arrive is also high on dope, so the "fault" is now the taxpayers, right?

[tombuch 0]

Quote

OK, the floater is DEAD. The first person to arrive says, um...she's dead. However, the first person to arrive is also high on dope, so the "fault" is now the taxpayers, right?

Yup. The county is responsible for EMS. If they hire a contractor they are responsible for the conduct of that contractor. The relationship the citizens have is with the public service provider---the county EMS division---and not with the poorly supervised private ambulance company or their individual workers.

I look at the skydiving world the same way. Our students have a relationship with the drop zone that they take their business to, and that business has a responsibility to supervise all the staff that are used. Simply defining the staff as "independent contractors" or farming the business out to a second company such as an aircraft leasing company, does not provide the business with immunity for gross negligence on the part of the contractor. The business is expected to be the eyes and ears of the the end user/customer, and act in the best interests of that customer. Failure to adequately supervise or enforce established standards should be actionable.
.

Tom Buchanan
Instructor Emeritus
Comm Pilot MSEL,G
Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

[rmsmith 1]

Quote

OK, the floater is DEAD. The first person to arrive says, um...she's dead. However, the first person to arrive is also high on dope, so the "fault" is now the taxpayers, right?

Quote

Yup. The county is responsible for EMS. If they hire a contractor they are responsible for the conduct of that contractor. The relationship the citizens have is with the public service provider---the county EMS division---and not with the poorly supervised private ambulance company or their individual workers.

I agree with you, but I'm unsure about the level of oversight that the county actually has over private company workers. The paperwork might say one thing, but the reality of the oversight is another. In this particular case, a person drowned, which is an easy thing to happen in open water scuba diving and even a swimming pool too. So the EMS arrives in 8-minutes or 15-minutes, the outcome is probably going to be the same. Having the county's taxpayers on the hook for these deaths tends to cause government entities everywhere to want to exclude high risk activities within their borders.

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

So the EMS arrives in 8-minutes or 15-minutes, the outcome is probably going to be the same. Having the county's taxpayers on the hook for these deaths tends to cause government entities everywhere to want to exclude high risk activities within their borders.

You are right about that. Welcome to no fault tort law.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[mr2mk1g 10]

***OK, the floater is DEAD. The first person to arrive says, um...she's dead. However, the first person to arrive is also high on dope, so the "fault" is now the taxpayers, right?
***

Not over here, no. Here the claimant's wouldn't get anything unless they can prove causation. There are many elements of that must be shown in cases like this; proving a loss here is easy - someone's dead. Negligence and a duty of care again probably easy – it's likely established principle that the county has a duty of care to ensure ambulance cover (I'm guessing). Failing to prevent your paramedics getting off their face on smack while they're on duty is probably going to be seen as quite negligent and therefore also doesn't probably present much of a hurdle.

Causation though as I said, is the biggy here. The claimants would have to prove that the loss happened because of the negligent conduct of the defendant. Here as you point out that may well have been very difficult to show (although we're all guessing as to the true state of the evidence available).

This is the state of the law in the UK and I would be surprised if this was not also the case in the States, (although can't comment authoritatively of course). In which case I suspect the settlement was reached simply to keep the case out of the media. While some media obviously have picked up on this - imagine the papers response if this had gone to court and the County won. There would have been a complete shit storm hit the press. The headlines from the County point of view probably didn't bear thinking about.

Essentially I think what you have is a great example of the county paying people off to keep the things quiet and claimants holding the County to ransom over some damaging info.

Where private companies are concerned this is perhaps less worrisome – they understandably don't like bad press and it's often worth paying out a lawsuit you think you would win simply because it's cheaper than the loss the bad advertising is going to cause you.

When it's a public body however, such as here where you're talking about a whole County – well that is a different situation. You may be looking at an example of where a publicly elected body paid public money (taxes) to someone to keep the public (their bosses) from finding out how badly they've fucked up.

I doubt the case would have any merits whatsoever in the UK. I can only guess about the States; but my guess would be that it's the same situation there.

I'm guessing that's only going to make you madder though...