Family of Spanish woman files suit against Disney for death following Indiana Jones ride

Posted Thursday, September 27, 2001 4:42 AM | Contributed by Jeff

A Spanish woman died two months after riding Disneyland's Indiana Jones ride, passing out originally a few hours after riding. The lawyer currently handling the suits against Magic Mountain for the aneurysm on Goliath and Knott's Berry Farm for the apparent aneurysm on Montezooma's Revenge is representing the Spanish family. The victim had a pre-existing aneurysm, but the lawyer believes the ride triggered her death.

Read more from The LA Times.

Related parks

Thursday, September 27, 2001 4:46 AM
Again this year this is unbelieveable!How many deaths are we up too this year? 10? *** This post was edited by NITROman on 9/27/2001. ***
+0
Thursday, September 27, 2001 4:46 AM
They lawyer says: "There has been misrepresentation and false advertising in terms of safety and things have to change."

I'm sorry, I've never been to the So Cal parks... does it say somewhere that the rides are perfectly safe if you have an unknown medical condition?

You know, it's odd. People frequently die after having a heart attack on a ride, and yet no suits are filed (it happened on Raptor this year). How is this different?

I hope Disney doesn't settle. I'm also guessing Knott's will not settle on the Montezooma case, not when they have a record of 45 million previous rides.

-----------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com
"From the global village... in the age of communication!"
Watch the grass grow!

+0
Thursday, September 27, 2001 5:11 AM
I'm not even going to start up.  These people just get me really PO'ed.

Did you know that if you trip and fall on your neighbors sidewalk, it is perfectly legal to sue them?  Unbeleivable.

-----------------
Bomb Squad Technician

If you see me running, try and keep up!

+0
Thursday, September 27, 2001 5:35 AM
How in the world could a park be held accountable for a pre-existing condition, that the patrons themselves don't know about? Are we going to start seeing signs that say "This ride not recommended for those with undetected medical conditions?"

I am sick and tired of everyone always trying to blame someone else for things that happen instead of taking some responsibility. Again I am reminded of the idiot that jumped into the whale tank at Sea World and drowned, and his family sued the park.

If there's any justice the parks will not settle, and will not be found negligent in any way.

-------------
Aaron
The Buzzer formerly known as RagingBull.

+0
Thursday, September 27, 2001 6:53 AM
Too bad we can't get any of the scum sucking lawyers who profit from these ridiculous cases(I'm sorry to hear the girl died, but it's no ones fault) to have a few any aneurysms and put all of us out of our misery. I hope this doesn't sound too cold hearted but I'm beyond sick and tired of lawyers coming up with these ridiculous statements."There has been misrepresentation and false advertising in terms of safety and things have to change," Novack said. "It cannot be business as usual when people are dying on these attractions." I can't recall any incident recently where someone dying was "business as usual". I wonder if they are going to file lawsuits against every doctor in the world because one of them probably should have told her not to get on the ride because she had a medical condition. Maybe all of us should start suing all the lawyers for the stress they cause the world. *** This post was edited by phil on 9/27/2001. ***
+0
Thursday, September 27, 2001 7:24 AM
Anyone else find it odd that the same lawyer is representing all three families. You can probably add the family of the Perilous Plunge woman to this list as well. Is this the ambulance chasing of the new millennium?
-----------------
And then Jerry said, "Take care of yourselves, and each other".
+0
Thursday, September 27, 2001 8:11 AM
I don't think the death rate is any higher than other years. Once again though, it's points to California as having a high number of deaths.
+0
Thursday, September 27, 2001 9:15 AM
Umm....hello? The reason California has a high number of deaths is due to the high population density of the state, as well as the fact that the parks are open year-round. More people die in California because there's more people in California. The majority of people that have died in California parks this year have been California residents.
+0
Thursday, September 27, 2001 9:18 AM

What bothers me most is that here is another death, that went unreported to OHSA.. so how do we know how many deaths and accidents are really happening when the parks are not forthcomming?

The sampling methods used by the CPS was proven prone to error...so we have no accurate understanding of the "real" number of deaths at parks...we do not even know how many serious injuries happen...

So how can anyone say that these rides are safe or unsafe? There is just NO way of knowing untill these parks are held to be accountable!

As far as the same atty handling these cases... it looks like he /she has developed a specialty in law..( like; malpractice, crimunal law, corperate..now amusement park death/injury) which says more about the number of these accidents then it does about the attys!

Disney kept this quiet, and they just were taken to court over that Indiana Jones ride!! THe deal there..they didnt disclose the # of brain injuries and the lady settled... wonder why they didnt come clean then? cause they KNEW about this death and it would have cost them more in that settlement!!!

There is no way to know if this is average or not..we wont know till these damned parks are forced to be honest about the death and accidents at their sites!

+0
Thursday, September 27, 2001 9:23 AM
BB: As the park said... they didn't know about the death until after the suit was filed. Disney does a lot of things, but I'm sure mind reading isn't one of them. In fact, you can bet a case will be made that there's really no proof that the woman didn't do something to trigger the aneurysm after she left the park, and that's only a secondary defense if a judge or jury is actually insane enough to indicate that a park could be liable for someone's unknown condition.

-----------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com
"From the global village... in the age of communication!"
Watch the grass grow!

+0
Thursday, September 27, 2001 9:39 AM
I do not like this whole thing as of late. These money hungry families and lawyer trying to sue the parks for something that could not be helped. I know, yeah it's sad that the people died, but they didn't know that they had whatever they had and neither did any of the parks. What's going to happen? Are they going to have to hire full time doctors to check each person as they enter the park and say which rides they CAN AND CAN'T RIDE?!?! That's completely ridiculous not to mention absurd! As for Disney hiding information, I wouldn't be surprised, because Disney was actually an evil man, but no one saw it, or wanted to say anything about it, so, it reflects on what his parks go through concerning all of the injuries / deaths, etc.
+0
Thursday, September 27, 2001 10:44 AM
hmmmmmmm...What if this woman had been in the perfume section of a Macys, and someone squirted her with a sample of the latest scent, this leads to her sneezing which in turn causes the pre-existing aneurysm to burst? Would the family then sue Macys for the unsafe promotion of a product which lead to a death???? Or better yet...what if she had eaten a lot of Uncle Bens Rice which in turn bound her up with major constipation, she then pushes more excessively than usual while trying to relieve herself and the aneurysm bursts? Is Uncle Ben liable for inducing lethal constipation? This is what this sue happy country is coming to. I hate lawyers.


*** This post was edited by Figaro on 9/27/2001. *** *** This post was edited by Figaro on 9/27/2001. ***

+0
Thursday, September 27, 2001 11:04 AM
This article even makes it sound like she was well AWARE of her existing aneurysm, but rode anyway. Is there no WARNING sign on Indiana Jones like there is on EVERY other ride in existence?? I am sure that almost all parks will settle out of court just to keep publicity at a low, even though they would win the case. This lawyer knows that and will continue to profit off these poor victims without ever going to trial or proving any wrong doing. Sad but True.
-----------------
My other car is a Giovanola!
+0
Thursday, September 27, 2001 12:18 PM
This attraction is brutal, research and I'm talking about actual research not 2nd hand research, shows this attraction to be rough and to have an extreme affect on the upper body. BB let me ask you this, what type of credenitials do you have? Becaus you seem like a smart person, but you go by a lot of 2nd and sometimes 3rd hand info which isnt very affective.
+0
Thursday, September 27, 2001 12:25 PM
BB: You always seem to find a justification to defend the victim no matter who is at fault... and I think that is mostly due to the accident you had on the Ranger at SFDL a number of years ago. That's all good and fine, but somehow, I think this should be more clear-cut than the lady falling off the Perlious Plunge at Knotts.

This clearly looks to be the victim's fault, and not the park's responsibility what-so-ever. As bad as Disney is like Microsoft is, Disney didn't know about this until the lawsuit was filed.

I sure hope that they do prepare a defense and do not opt to settle out of court. If they did, then that just gives the motivation that other people who were hurt at other parks the opportunity to hire a lawyer and cash in... regardless who was at fault.

C'mon Disney... do something right for once!!! :)

-----------
"Proud to be an American!!" *** This post was edited by DawgByte II on 9/27/2001. ***

+0
Thursday, September 27, 2001 12:33 PM
Not to sound too sarcastic but what's next, open MRI's at the main gates?

"Uh, sorry ma'am, we can't let you in the park. You have a possible blockage in the brain that may cause an aneurism."

X Factor


-------------
SFWoA: An Unofficial Guide
http://sfohio.tripod.com

+0
Thursday, September 27, 2001 1:00 PM
Nitro: 

This death did not even occur this year.  There have been 2 deaths this year due to accidents on amusement rides.  This is as close to the average of a little over 2 as you can get.  California has also had a rash of 3 deaths on amusement rides that have occurred due to preexisting conditions.  The coroners reports have made it clear that the deaths were not caused by the rides.  The ride was simply the trigger for a death that was going to happen very soon no matter what.  Dozens of other daily activities could have also triggered the deaths.

BB: 

I agree that the CPSC's accident data is very flawed.  But, do we need to spend large sums of money to set up reporting systems for every type of accident no matter how rare?    We could quickly end up with special reporting systems for accidents caused by garden hoses, beds, televisions, golf, etc.  (All of these cause more deaths and injuries than amusement rides.)  The simple fact is this:  Amusement ride accidents result in an average of less that 3 deaths per year.  Few other human activities are as safe.  Existing civil law is adequate to deal with the few unforgivable lapses in safety that do occur.  Regulation by the CPSC has done little to reduce the number of accidents related to portable rides.

An unreported death even vaguely related to an amusement ride in this country is extremely rare.  Although, I must admit that the CPSC seems to have more difficulty accurately tracking amusement ride deaths than the web sites on amusement ride safety do.  This death was unreported for some time only because the actual death occurred in another country, and the next of kin chose to not report it to either the park or the authorities. 

+0
Thursday, September 27, 2001 2:02 PM
It's sad that this woman died the way she did, collapsing during her honeymoon.

I'm not familiar with the details or intensity level of this ride, so I can't comment on that aspect of it.  However, everything we do has risks, walking down the street, getting on a plane or going to a theme park.  There is an inherent risk no matter what we do, and everyone must be aware of that.  We take a risk when we get into a car.  We take one when we mow the lawn.  Yes, we take one when we visit a theme park, and even when we get out of bed in the morning.

I believe that this unfortunate event is neither the fault of the park nor the rider, but is the result of a pre-existing condition that neither was aware of.  There is a TREMENDOUS difference between negligence, and an event that no one has any control over.

+0
Thursday, September 27, 2001 2:18 PM
i can understand the one about Indiana Jones because that ride is actually rough and you could hit your head if youre not paying attention

but the other one was obviously preexisting, i mean at least 40 million people have rode and not gotten hurt

if someone goes to eat somewhere and gets something but they have a really bad allergic reaction and die, do they sue the restraunt?

+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...