Posted Friday, August 18, 2006 9:34 AM | Contributed by rhinozero8
In the lawsuit filed in Warren County, four people said that Paramount's Kings Island failed to maintain the ride in a safe condition and failed to inspect the ride and discover any and all safety issues and defects. The most seriously injured of the four plaintiffs is Crissie Lorick, who suffered a fractured sternum, fractured ribs and other injures, totaling medical bills in excess of $20,000.
Read more from WCMH/Columbus.
I don't know the details of the structural failure, but somebody needs to take responsibility for it, whether it's the park or RCCA. That won't happen unless there's a suit.
This is one of the few times that I think an amusement park related lawsuit is warranted. Riding a coaster and getting off with a broken sternum is serious business, and this was obviously not rider error.
Michael Darling is correct: The best resolution is an out of court settlement.
park failed to maintain the ride in a safe condition and failed to inspect the ride and discover any and all safety issues and defects.
This is lawyer speak. They have set up an impossible standard for the argument and accepted it as reasonable. It is not reasonable for any piece of machinery owned by any company or individual to have zero safety isues. No park or individual owner of any piece of equipment could EVER anticipate all possible accident scenerios. There is a percentage (small) failure risk with everything.
Again...this has nothing to do with this particular case...as it sounds like somebody screwed up big time for such a massive failure. My beef is with their lawyers moving the standard to "impossible" and apparently doing so with a straight face.
KI/CF (?) knows this should NOT have happened. They will do the right thing and compensate accordingly. I'm not certain a publicity seeking lawyer quoting impossible scenerios helps his clients' case. If anything, it may hurt by tainting credibility. They already have the winning hand...there is no need to bluff more. At this point it seems to be for spite only.
You can't easily check for this kind of stuff, which is why KI is stating that their inspecitons wouldn't have found this failure mode. It was a poor specimen of wood in an unfortunate location.
I think it is fair to ask KI to cover the medical expenses, but I believe to call them negligent and expect further compensation is unreasonable.
Wood is not like steel where it is manufactured and has a certain level of quality control. Wood is visually graded, which is a very subjective process. Sometimes they're way off, like in this case. Is this Kings Island's fault? Sounds like the lawyers will be deciding that one!
It is pain and suffering where the lawyers and plantiffs get greedy usually and out of control. Unless you are permantently hurt from something that is outright negligent, most of it is not warrented and only skyrockets the cost of insurance for EVERYONE that has any kind of insurance.
We don't have the ability to insepect every ride we get on, so we have to rely on the parks to do it. If the ride falls apart the park is at fault. Thats my opinion.
1. The state or quality of being negligent.
2. A negligent act or a failure to act.
3. Law. Failure to exercise the degree of care considered reasonable under the circumstances, resulting in an unintended injury to another party.
As Cincydj said in his post above, in order to be found "negligent" it would have to be proven the park did not do a proper job in maintaining and inspecting the ride.
Considering the park can prove they inspected the ride that very morning, and if they can prove the failure was a quick failure that could not have been anticipated, then the park would not be "negligent" as described by law.
Medical expenses and lost wages should and likely will be covered by the park, simply because I don't believe CF will be one to blow off the people who were hurt. But raking CF for whatever they can based upon "negligence" could be unwarranted.
An unscrupulous person could potentially claim short or long term disability and ask for months of lost wages. Last fall, I had carpal tunnel surgery on my left hand. During my pre-op appointment, I asked the surgeon how long it would be until I could return to work. He answered "how long do you want to be off?" He would have given me several weeks if I had asked for them plus I could have claimed disability.
What's a reasonable time period for a broken sternum? I have no clue. Did it affect her marriage, her love life? Did it prevent her from running the kids to soccer practice? (i think this is was CF would not want to go into...)
You must be logged in to post