Jury awards family of Tyre Sampson $310 million in Orlando Freefall death case

This article doesn’t mention this but I read in another over the weekend that Funtime did not appear in court to contest the case.

That explains why it was only one day. Sounds like a default judgment. The evidence seemed cut and dry to me. I doubt they're ever going to get any of that money, and I doubt the company even exists anymore.

“The lawsuit highlighted glaring safety oversights, including the absence of seat belts − a safety enhancement that would have cost just $22 per seat or $660 in total for all seats,”

Does this mean that I should buy stock in seat belt companies? What ride manufacturer is going to see this and not put seat belts on everything going forward?

Jeff:

The evidence seemed cut and dry to me.

The evidence against Funtime? The only thing mentioned in the article against the manufacturer is that they did not include seat belts on the ride. Trying to remember back to when this happened, I thought all of the issues were with ICON for the modifications that they made.

So it would appear that this judgement is solely based on the lack of seat belts.

We "litigated" this (like everything else) when the report went public. Basically the bolts that would limit the range of the no-go state had been moved to allow more room than the restraint could tolerate while keeping a person in. Or something like that, can't find the thread.

No one wants to defend one of these cases. Parents of the kid in the courtroom. Kid didn't go anything wrong. Why these cases tend to settle. May also be the case that Funtime gave up the ghost understanding the company is hopeless bankrupt based on what happened. If that is the case, even more reason not to attend.

Would seatbelts have limited the modification ICON made? With seatbelts with a given maximum length, would ICON have been able to modify the restraint and still have the seatbelt lock?

To be clear, I don't think ICON did anything. I believe the operator was a concessionaire.

I don't remember who made the modifications. Just went off post before mine. Seems to me a seatbelt could have limited the modifications that could be made. If a given length seatbelt would only allow 20 degrees off vertical for the support (and that was determined to be safe by the manufacturer), That length seatbelt wouldn't lock if the angle was increased to 45 degrees. Totally making those numbers up.

May also be the case that the plaintiff presented evidence as to what manufacturer could have done to make ride more safe and because no one presented any conflicting evidence (because there was no defense), the jury found for the plaintiff. We have an adversarial court system but if there are no adversaries, the results may not make sense/be just.

My apologies - I don't remember who made the modifications. But it was not the manufacturer. So their only fault in this is that their ride did not include seat belts.

It may be a moot point if they are out of business, but how are they on the hook for $310M for not putting seat belts on a ride in which the operator made adjustments that were outside of the manufacturer's instructions and/or control?

This seems to be setting a very bad precedence for the ride industry.

The manufacturer and the operator was the same company.

Tuesday's verdict was against the ride's manufacturer, Funtime-Handels. Tyre's family previously reached a settlement with ICON park and the ride operator.

So they got sued separately as the manufacturer and the operator?

Again, what am I missing? How is the manufacturer liable simply because seat belts were not provided?

Expect plaintiffs' counsel entered some evidence that seatbelts would have made a difference. With no defense, no contradictory evidence was submitted. Jury/court go on what has been presented at trial (which lasted just one day).

But because of that, don't expect decision has much (if any) precedential value in terms of other cases/manufacturers.

What makes anyone think Funtime went out of business? Ride Entertainment (Funtime's sales rep in the US) was still advertising their rides last month at IAAPA.

I will continue to show my ignorance of legal proceedings. The example that I came up with is automatic emergency braking (AEB) for cars. The 2016 car that I purchased did not have AEB even though at the time AEB was available on other cars. Now suppose I am in an accident and the crash investigators state that if my car would have had AEB the accident would have been avoided. Am I allowed to sue the car manufacturer for their failure to provide AEB on my car?

You can sue for anything. There are sanctions for bringing frivolous suits but they are rarely imposed. Question is whether you would be successful in that suit. I would expect you would not. But if the manufacturer of your vehicle doesn't appear to defend that case (extremely unlikely scenario), you may well win the case.

There are some differences in your example and the ride accident. You knew your car didn't have AEB. You could have purchased one that had AEB but you chose not to do so. Kid on the freefall ride didn't know what the safety systems were on the ride. What was needed. Could reasonably rely on manufacturer/park to make that determination.

Ours is an adversarial system. View is that if both parties try to prove their side of the case in front of impartial judge/jury, justice will prevail. Doesn't always work that way though. Particularly if there is only one adversary.

Thank you for your help in making this clearer to be GoBucks

Seatbelts are an additional failsafe, sure, but the lack of a seatbelt is not a safety oversight and the suggestion of same is nonsense.

By the same logic every ride seat should have at least three of them – since every additional seatbelt will improve safety.

(As a side note, seatbelts are effectively mandatory in Australia - there are quite a few production model coasters where the Australian installation is the only one to have seatbelts.)

The thing I believe the safety belt would have done was just tell the ride op that this person is too big to ride, even if the sensor had been adjusted.

What if my car has seatbelts, but I am vehemently opposed to using them?