Thread: “They were just, like, ‘I’m sorry! I’m sorry!”

Originally Posted by Oglethorpe

I agree that the girl is an idiot, but someone whose car was wrecked for running into an uncovered manhole would be able to sue as well. What the hell is a manhole doing uncovered? To me, this is more negligence on the part of the township and it just so happened that a girl who wasn't paying attention fell into it.


EDIT: and before I get crucified by the anti-text conglomerate, let's just say that it was some kids playing ball or a young child who wandered off. The opportunities for accidents are countless and all could be avoided if somebody had done their job properly.

I agree. She was being dumb, and her mom sounds like an airhead, but the hole should have been covered. Since nothing really happened, I don't think any settlement needs to be huge, but blame should be squarely on the city.

Originally Posted by Oglethorpe

I agree that the girl is an idiot, but someone whose car was wrecked for running into an uncovered manhole would be able to sue as well. What the hell is a manhole doing uncovered? To me, this is more negligence on the part of the township and it just so happened that a girl who wasn't paying attention fell into it.

10k sounds about right.


EDIT: and before I get crucified by the anti-text conglomerate, let's just say that it was some kids playing ball or a young child who wandered off. The opportunities for accidents are countless and all could be avoided if somebody had done their job properly.

Don't you think each case should be handled on its own merits instead of the "what ifs"?

Originally Posted by JMS

Don't you think each case should be handled on its own merits instead of the "what ifs"?

I think they got lucky -- if one of those "what if's" had played out you'd be hearing a whole lot more about it that you are now. This article is meant (whether the publisher acknowledges it or not) to poke fun a the fact that a girl got hurt because she was texting and fell into a hole. In a sick kind of way it gives people from the old fashioned "what is with with these kids and their driving on the phone and texting all the time" camp satisfaction.

And with that said, I do think that in this case, based on its own merit, the blame falls squarely on the township workers. Based on its own merit, the settlement should/will be smaller than it would have been if a blind guy or an old lady or a toddler should have happened upon that hole.

I'm off the now.

Cheers!


EDIT (again because I can't seem to get an entire thought out in one shot): For the record I am in the no phones while driving camp just the same as you guys probably are. It causes accidents. But this girl was walking.

Originally Posted by Quick Orange

I agree. She was being dumb, and her mom sounds like an airhead, but the hole should have been covered. Since nothing really happened, I don't think any settlement needs to be huge, but blame should be squarely on the city.

Presumably, those barriers should have been wrapped in a soft layer of something, just in case some one walked into them?

Seriously, it's a hole in the ground, who can I sue if I step in a rabbit hole or walk into a lamp post tomorrow?

People make mistakes, accidents happen. Money should not become part of the equation. Greed will destroy the west.

Originally Posted by gregs656

Seriously, it's a hole in the ground, who can I sue if I step in a rabbit hole or walk into a lamp post tomorrow?

People make mistakes, accidents happen. Money should not become part of the equation. Greed will destroy the west.

This is not the same as a "rabbit hole". An open manhole is a hole in the ground in a public thoroughfare where there should not normally be a hole in the ground. The workers who opened that hole are indeed charged with the responsibility to safeguard the public from the very real dangers of that opening in a public thouroughfare. I saw a car drive across an open storm drain, tear its front tire (tyre) from the car and careen into the storefront across the sidewalk. The municipality was completely liable for leaving the grate off the storm drain with no safety zone set up. This is exactly the same thing.

Gregs, the difference is that the light pole was always there, and you shouldn't have left the sidewalk. 99% of the time, that hole is covered and is just another part of the path. A soft barrier would have been fine- anything to signal that something was different. As angry as people like her make me, it's really not her fault.

EDIT: I realized I misread your post about soft barriers (reading on an ipod can be difficult sometimes). Honestly, it was obnoxious. Of course we don't need soft barriers in case people walk into it. I don't think it's too much to expect our walking paths to either be entirely usable or marked where they are not.

Originally Posted by gregs656

Presumably, those barriers should have been wrapped in a soft layer of something, just in case some one walked into them?

Seriously, it's a hole in the ground, who can I sue if I step in a rabbit hole or walk into a lamp post tomorrow?

People make mistakes, accidents happen. Money should not become part of the equation. Greed will destroy the west.

Perhaps it's wrong for us to assume that we can safely walk/drive down the road and all manhole covers will be on.

Let me bring up a case that recently happened to me that is very similar to this. I was in Las Vegas at the pool at the Hard Rock. It was 105 degrees outside, sunny as all hell. I had to take a leak so I went inside. Now, having gone from the desert sun to the (relatively) dark inside of a casino, it took my eyes a good 30-45 seconds to adjust. No, I hadn't had anything to drink (yet).

Now to my dismay, there was a hand truck laying in the middle of the hallway. I was not texting while walking, but I tripped right over the damn thing and cut and sprained my foot. It's still not quite right today (a month later).

Does this make my case any different from the girl's? The hand truck was not properly "marked", and I sustained an injury. Being the type of person I am, I didn't say anything to anybody, but I do believe the hotel staff was negligent and I do believe I could have complained and maybe gotten a comped room or more. I believe it would have been my right to do so, even though I chose not to.

I think the two cases are very similar, in that because someone was injured because of negligence, the underlying facts are irrelevant. If somebody had done their job properly, the injury was avoidable.

That's where I'm coming from.

Cheers!

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

I'll bet a blind man or woman would have navigated around it without injury

sounds like the makings of a Japanese gameshow

I'd watch

Originally Posted by Oglethorpe

The hand truck was not properly "marked", and I sustained an injury. Being the type of person I am, I didn't say anything to anybody, but I do believe the hotel staff was negligent and I do believe I could have complained and maybe gotten a comped room or more. I believe it would have been my right to do so, even though I chose not to.

in this case I find that cussing out the person responsible for the stupidity makes me feel a hell of a lot better than a comped room

generally if it is obvious that they were at fault they will just stand and take it

who goes to complain to their boss that they messed something up and someone got mad enough to yell at them?
" he huwt my feewings"

it don't happen
(and in Vegas I'll bet they got it on camera)


plus I don't see the point in endangering a persons job when all there deserved was a stern lecture

I'm with you GW... but it doesn't do me any good to bitch and moan about getting hurt. Unless somebody is ready to cut me a check right then and there I'm not going to waste my time. I was in Vegas -- I had drinking / gambling / getting awesome to do. No time for complaining, etc...

Originally Posted by gratewhitehuntr

in this case I find that cussing out the person responsible for the stupidity makes me feel a hell of a lot better than a comped room

generally if it is obvious that they were at fault they will just stand and take it

who goes to complain to their boss that they messed something up and someone got mad enough to yell at them?
" he huwt my feewings"

it don't happen
(and in Vegas I'll bet they got it on camera)

Originally Posted by Quick Orange

Honestly, it was obnoxious.

Maybe, but was it wrong? Walking into a post (that by the way, wasn't ALWAYS there like the ground was, Icedog) is equally as dangerous as stepping into a hole is it not?

Ogle, blame the fact that your eyes didn't adjust fast enough, you could have walked into pretty much anything. You were injured because you knew you couldn't see properly and you kept walking, negligence, sure - on your part, though.

You would think nature would have made tree drunks yellow and water red, so we wouldn't step into them by mistake.

Sorry, if you don't put in the effort to concentrate where the next foot is going, you deserve an accident to teach you a lesson, man made hole or otherwise.