674 users online (76 members and 598 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,523

    Teen passenger in speeding car sues driver who was hit

    Teen passenger in speeding car sues driver who was hit

    SALEM The driver of a minivan who was seriously injured when she was struck head-on by a drag-racing teenager doing 81 mph is now being sued by the teenager's passenger, who was also injured.

    A lawsuit filed yesterday in Salem Superior Court suggests that Christine Speliotis "carelessly and negligent (sic) failed to avoid the collision with the other vehicle head on."

    http://www.salemnews.com/punews/loca...212205251.html

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Atlanta GA
    Posts
    7,376
    This lawyer ranks right up there with the one who is suing the woman for posting about her landlord on twitter.

    http://www.facebook.com/ext/share.ph...=FJ0RZ&u=w6QBD

    And they wonder why everyone hates lawyers.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Charlotte, North Carolina
    Posts
    1,750
    wow, what balls, ya know? eh, hopefully the judge will see the stupidity in this suit and will throw it out AND give the passenger a good talking to.
    Find Brian Shaffer!!
    www.findbrianshaffer.com


    Janet Christiansen, Kaiden, and Family, justice WILL prevail!

    JUSTICE FOR AMBER!

    ~*Cancel my subscription, I'm THROUGH with your issues*~

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Dana Point,CA
    Posts
    52,752
    Actually i don't think this is that uncommon is it? I think in reality they are suing the driver's insurance company to help pay for their suffering and/or injuries. I can think of 2 people i know offhand that were not at fault in collisions where they had passengers that were injured. The passengers sued the insurance company of the driver in both cases and got some money to help pay their bills.

    ETA: ok I re read more carefully and see he is suing the driver and the insurance company. I agree that is a bit much, but certainly to be expected these days.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    at home
    Posts
    23,626
    Quote Originally Posted by JBean View Post
    Actually i don't think this is that uncommon is it? I think in reality they are suing the driver's insurance company to help pay for their suffering and/or injuries. I can think of 2 people i know offhand that were not at fault in collisions where they had passengers that were injured. The passengers sued the insurance company of the driver in both cases and got some money to help pay their bills.

    ETA: ok I re read more carefully and see he is suing the driver and the insurance company. I agree that is a bit much, but certainly to be expected these days.
    time for major tort reform

    left to their devices. lawyers will never run out of unique, ways, and reasons, to bring suits. time to rein them in. draw some lines in the sand

    if not, our courts will continue to be overburdened, and overwhelmed, with even more frivilous law suits.

    lawyers are somehow continually attracted to the "deep pockets"

    always the possibility of quick, out of court, settlements, just to avoid any negative publicity

    lawyers have two reasons for taking cases, money publicity
    Last edited by Buzz Mills; 08-02-2009 at 01:54 AM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Atlanta GA
    Posts
    7,376
    Quote Originally Posted by JBean View Post
    Actually i don't think this is that uncommon is it? I think in reality they are suing the driver's insurance company to help pay for their suffering and/or injuries. I can think of 2 people i know offhand that were not at fault in collisions where they had passengers that were injured. The passengers sued the insurance company of the driver in both cases and got some money to help pay their bills.

    ETA: ok I re read more carefully and see he is suing the driver and the insurance company. I agree that is a bit much, but certainly to be expected these days.
    JBean, no one would complain if he were just suing the driver of the car he was in (the one that was going over 80 in a 30mph zone).

    But, this story is about him suing the woman they hit. Yep, suing her for "failing to avoid the collision" despite her not doing anything wrong, not being charged with anything, and being severely injured herself.

    She must have better insurance. Pure sleaze.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Cali -- but im a north east girl at heart!
    Posts
    424
    I hope this doesn't end up with one of those complete moron judges that wants to give the kids a second chance so takes it out on this woman ...

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Dana Point,CA
    Posts
    52,752
    Quote Originally Posted by angelmom View Post
    JBean, no one would complain if he were just suing the driver of the car he was in (the one that was going over 80 in a 30mph zone).

    But, this story is about him suing the woman they hit. Yep, suing her for "failing to avoid the collision" despite her not doing anything wrong, not being charged with anything, and being severely injured herself.

    She must have better insurance. Pure sleaze.
    LOL I should not read at night. I thought the occupant of the car that was not at fault was suing the driver of the car he was in. I got it now. slow but steady that's me.

    thanks angelmom.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Charlotte, North Carolina
    Posts
    1,750


    Quote Originally Posted by adnoid View Post
    This case seems to me ripe for a judge to dismiss and order sanctions against the moving party's attorney for malicious prosecution and being a total tool.
    Find Brian Shaffer!!
    www.findbrianshaffer.com


    Janet Christiansen, Kaiden, and Family, justice WILL prevail!

    JUSTICE FOR AMBER!

    ~*Cancel my subscription, I'm THROUGH with your issues*~

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    19,111
    Quote Originally Posted by Buzzm1 View Post
    time for major tort reform

    left to their devices. lawyers will never run out of unique, ways, and reasons, to bring suits. time to rein them in. draw some lines in the sand

    if not, our courts will continue to be overburdened, and overwhelmed, with even more frivilous law suits.

    lawyers are somehow continually attracted to the "deep pockets"

    always the possibility of quick, out of court, settlements, just to avoid any negative publicity

    lawyers have two reasons for taking cases, money publicity
    Almost everyone likes the idea of tort reform, but how would you go about it? The British system of forcing the loser to pay all court costs helps to reduce frivolous suits, but it also discourages the poor from asserting their rights against the wealthy and individuals from taking on big corporations.

    Since our government tends to favor big contributors, we need a tort system that helps to level the playing field, I think.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    12,317
    Well, I am sitting here right now with a titanium plate with screws in my neck, long scars on both elbows, and one on my right knee compliments of a 16 year old driver who had no insurance.

    I was driving a small Mitsubishi Eclipse, and he was driving a very old heavy Jeep. My little car was totaled. I could not have 'avoided the collision' because I had no time to act. In the split second I could see what was going to happen, all I could do is brace myself and stand on my brakes.

    This kid got smart with the police officer who responded to the accident and was arrested.

    I was extremely lucky to have even gotten out of that tiny vehicle alive. I had to have 6 surgeries as a result of the accident. My husband had City of Shreveport insurance from having been a retired police officer. Anyway, our insurance paid for all of my surgeries because the little snot that hit me had no insurance. We could have sued his parents because he still lived at home, but they had nothing and no type of insurance on either of their vehicles. I wanted to sue them for medical. The old saying that you cannot get blood out of a turnip applied in my case.

    You can file anything you want to, but this is a case without merit and I am sure will be found as such. (better be)

    I am left without being able to ride horses anymore, which was my passion. I have terrible headaches and may have to have another neck surgery at some point.

    Sorry for the long post, but I am infuriated with this little snot and his lawyer. I am for tort reform to an extent, but I do feel a person should be able to sue when a case has true merit. I certainly would have sued if this little POS had insurance or anything else of value. The accident was his fault, not mine.

    **If anyone even jokingly accuses me of having a screw loose, I go !
    Thoughts and prayers for the people of Paris and all of France!

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Atlanta GA
    Posts
    7,376
    What about a system where it costs the losing ATTORNEY something as well as the person bringing a frivolous suit.

    I mean besides their "good name". Some of them don't care if they get the publicity, and some never had one to begin with.

    Maybe then they'd think twice about these stupid cases, and insurance co's would bother to fight. If the money went back to them to cover atty's fees, then it would be worth it to fight a few.

    I don't think it should be loser pays every time, because some cases really need to be heard. But if there is a determination of a frivolous or nuisance suit, then the attorney should be held responsible as well. After all, they are the ones who help their client determine if the case is appropriate, right? They are the ones who have been to law school. You wouldn't sue a patient whose doctor wrote the wrong prescription!

    Too many people are getting bad "prescriptions" from sleazy lawyers who will do anything to make a buck or get their name in the news. The only way to make them stop is to hit them where it hurts - in the wallet. And then maybe put their name and picture in the paper next to their fine for being a

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    19,111
    Quote Originally Posted by angelmom View Post
    What about a system where it costs the losing ATTORNEY something as well as the person bringing a frivolous suit.

    I mean besides their "good name". Some of them don't care if they get the publicity, and some never had one to begin with.

    Maybe then they'd think twice about these stupid cases, and insurance co's would bother to fight. If the money went back to them to cover atty's fees, then it would be worth it to fight a few.

    I don't think it should be loser pays every time, because some cases really need to be heard. But if there is a determination of a frivolous or nuisance suit, then the attorney should be held responsible as well. After all, they are the ones who help their client determine if the case is appropriate, right? They are the ones who have been to law school. You wouldn't sue a patient whose doctor wrote the wrong prescription!

    Too many people are getting bad "prescriptions" from sleazy lawyers who will do anything to make a buck or get their name in the news. The only way to make them stop is to hit them where it hurts - in the wallet. And then maybe put their name and picture in the paper next to their fine for being a
    Um, in fact, angelmom, that IS the system we have now. When a lawyer takes a case on contingency--as lawyers do in many if not most civil suits--and loses, she eats the tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars it took her to prep and try the case.

    Which may be why some lawyers look for cases with big payoffs: it's a way to support the cases they lose.

    Some have proposed we abolish the practice of paying lawyers with a share of the eventual settlement or award, but to do so will effectively banish the poor from the judicial system.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    19,111
    Quote Originally Posted by adnoid View Post
    And I image the concept of the 16 year old hiring an attorney and suing YOU for the accident would be outrageous to you.

    Even if the law allows it.

    Even if it's a "price we pay" to allow people their day in court.

    Even if it's "just the insurance companies".

    You were wronged and you should not be further wronged.

    I do believe we need to reform the civil system. I believe there was a time when no attorney would accept a client who wished to sue the victim of a crash the client caused - but that's not the situation today. So since these cases are about money, I'd say make it cost the loser.

    The loser pays system is in use throughout Europe (Aren't we always being lectured about how the Europeans have everything figured out and are smarter than us? I think I've heard that argument):

    http://www.reason.com/news/show/29696.html

    "...The rule's ubiquitousness should give its critics pause. If loser-pays is impractical, why has it lasted in so many places for so long? If it's rigid and historically contingent, how has it endured as philosophies of governance have come and gone? If it's just a way for the rich to grind down the poor, what is it doing in such social democracies as Sweden, Denmark, and the Netherlands? If it grips the middle class with fear, how do the burghers of Geneva, Sydney, and Toronto stand it?..."

    Even the Canadians do it, and Canadians are better than us I'm told. Food for thought.
    adnoid, I don't believe anyone has argued that everything is perfect in any country, EXCEPT, of course, Americans who frequently insist that this is "the greatest country on earth" and anyone who criticizes it is somehow a liar and a traitor.

    That being said, there's nothing wrong with looking at what works, and what doesn't, in other countries.

    The loser-pays-all system does indeed date from centuries with rigid class systems that protected the rich and propertied. That it has survived may be in part because most of the countries you list have strong consumer protection laws.

    And for the record let us note that even here in the States, a judge may make a plaintiff pay all costs if the judge finds the lawsuit sufficiently frivolous.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Atlanta GA
    Posts
    7,376
    Quote Originally Posted by Nova View Post
    Um, in fact, angelmom, that IS the system we have now. When a lawyer takes a case on contingency--as lawyers do in many if not most civil suits--and loses, she eats the tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars it took her to prep and try the case.

    Which may be why some lawyers look for cases with big payoffs: it's a way to support the cases they lose.

    Some have proposed we abolish the practice of paying lawyers with a share of the eventual settlement or award, but to do so will effectively banish the poor from the judicial system.
    I'm not talking about their hours and resources being lost. They can fold that into their other business, and also take it as a loss on their taxes. I'm talking about a civil penalty and fine for things that blatantly waste court time. And NO tax deduction for the loss!

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. MI - Jada Rankin, 15, shot to death, Detroit, 16 Oct 2016
    By los2188 in forum Crimes-Spotlight on Children
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-23-2016, 01:22 AM
  2. Driver blames dog for speeding
    By zwiebel in forum Bizarre and Off-Beat News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-29-2014, 10:36 AM
  3. Pony's 'selfie' saves speeding driver from a ticket
    By zwiebel in forum Bizarre and Off-Beat News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-02-2014, 12:38 AM
  4. Driver gets 70 speeding tickets in 5 months
    By Buzz Mills in forum Bizarre and Off-Beat News
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 08-23-2006, 08:56 PM
  5. Teen driver killed on way to visit Teen driver's shrine
    By Casshew in forum Bizarre and Off-Beat News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-17-2004, 04:23 PM