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

Put in place foolproof safety measures, and a better class of fool will come along.

You can't make the world 100% safe. There is a point where people have to take personal responsibility, and if they don't, they shouldn't be entitled to make financial profit from their own stupidity.

This girl was clearly more than 50% responsible for her accident. She is entitled to nothing but ridicule.

The world is more expensive because businesses have to shell out on insurance to pay compensation to idiots like this.

The only sad aspect of this case is that nobody got to record the event on a videophone.

Oh, also sad is the fact (in the photo) that NYC gets its manhole covers from India. Way to destroy your own economy, USA.

Originally Posted by smokelaw1

Well, damages would be whatever injuries she has. Whether they are her fault or not, or if this claim is actionable, that is another story.

If I remember correctly (BIG if)
Negligence = Duty + breach of duty which causes damages.

Do they have a duty to PHYSICALLY block a manhole (as opposed to simple signage?) If yes....then there is a breach of duty.
Next, did this breach of duty CAUSE the injury? Well, but for their breach (if indeed there is one), she would not have been injured. Then again, but-for her lack of care...she still would not have been injured (is the but-for test onus on the defendant or the plaintiff? I think in tort law, different states can see it differently).

If they do NOT have a duty to block the manhole, but simply putting up cones near it, or a sign, then they might be able to beat it, as this girl would not ahve seen a sign any more than the manhole, right?


Ah, negligence...so confusiong and counterintuitive.

True, but you also have to demonstrate that you attempted to mitigate your damages as well. Just because the crosswalk sign says walk does not mean that you blindly walk into the intersection. I believe that this is a common law statute that may vary state to state.

Originally Posted by Rajagra

Put in place foolproof safety measures, and a better class of fool will come along.

You can't make the world 100% safe. There is a point where people have to take personal responsibility, and if they don't, they shouldn't be entitled to make financial profit from their own stupidity.

This girl was clearly more than 50% responsible for her accident. She is entitled to nothing but ridicule.

The world is more expensive because businesses have to shell out on insurance to pay compensation to idiots like this.

The only sad aspect of this case is that nobody got to record the event on a videophone.

This may be true in England but not in the States. We pay taxes to maintain public thoroughfares. We do have the RIGHT to expect them to be safe and passable. If they are not, they get closed. This isn't as if the girl walked into the wall of a brick building. Whatever you think, it was negligence on the part of the work crew.

An interesting factoid for you gun lovers out there:
The manhole covers in Hartford, CT were made by the Colt Firearms company out of illegal handguns collected by the police.

Now all the manhole covers are going to go missing.

I agree that the city must keep public thouroughfares accessible. However, if a sidewalk is snow covered, or ice covered you would exercise due care. If you SAW a work crew and burly guys in bright reflective vests, you should exercise care. She was not exercising anything except her stupid muscles.

It is frivolous lawsuits like this that make me squirm. Was she hurt, no and by her own admission. Was she scared, yes, but so would any reasonable person. Did she suffer life long trauma or disfigurement, no at least until her parents get her into therapy and then the doc starts making her associate bad things with what happened.

We had a real case with a real person. He was blind in one eye and had myopic/cataract vision in the other. The city did not cone or rope off a large pot hole that he did not know was there. He spiral fractured his femur when he fell in. That is a real case of negligence, not this.

Both parties seem to bear some blame here....

But please let me rant a little - I'm so sick of people and the texting. I'm taking some college classes right now and I'm completely blown away. Some these youngsters (and some adults too) sit there in class texting while the teacher is teaching!!!! Even when we're watching video in the dark, the glow of cellphones is constant! That is if they're not surfing the net on their laptops! I sit behind one girl who spends the entire class on FaceBook. How disrespectful and rude! I see a few of these people several times a week and they are always texting! How empty are their lives? Ok, I'm done now.

Jordan

I can't believe I came to this thread so late. Call me cruel but lee's original post containing the news snippet just made me laugh. It seems the only thing more idiotic than falling down the hole and blaming someone else is being rewarded damages by someone else. It's lunacy!

But my question Lee is why did this story remind you of my ranting thread?

Edit: "The girl suffered a fright and some scrapes". -.-

Definitely the stuff of lawsuit history.

Originally Posted by icedog

This may be true in England but not in the States. We pay taxes to maintain public thoroughfares. We do have the RIGHT to expect them to be safe and passable.

I think the key word here is expect.

You can expect all you want, you can expect not to crash when you drive to work tomorrow, I reckon you're going to be pretty vigilant all the same though.

Originally Posted by sidneykidney

But my question Lee is why did this story remind you of my ranting thread?

Because she was "texting" when she fell into the hole

While it may seem funny because the girl was "texting", it is not her fault. It is strictly the responsibility of the men who removed the cover. Until the moment they remove the cover, there was no hazard. They caused the hazard, they alone are liable. The girl's activity at the time has no bearing so long as the walk way was open to the public.

Originally Posted by icedog

The girl's activity at the time has no bearing so long as the walk way was open to the public.

Sure it does. There's a common sense culpability. That's what this thread's supposed to be about - not the legality. Sure the men had responsibility to cover the hole. But that has no bearing on the fact that you can't walk around with your head down and expect to not get smacked. This is akin to having one's head up one's- er, having one's head in the sand. It's funny because it's true, and it's just common sense! She is a victim of her own making - the workers simply provided her an opportunity to exhibit her lack of comprehension when it comes to "watch where you're walking when you go down a street, especially when there are construction workers around." The way she got there was all her

Sure it would not have been funny if someone who obviously has a disability fell in, or circumstances that were out of the girl's control made it impossible for her to consciously avoid the manhole. But she was texting - who forced her? therefore it's funny and interesting and I hope is a lesson to others who walk around ignoring society around them in favor of giving one's total attention to a little plastic case that beeps all the time