How does a smoke detector prevent fire? I have several in my home and they only tell me when there is smoke – after a fire has already started. Smoke detectors don’t even put out a fire. I’m all for them, but this suit seems like another entitlement suit.
The article fails to mention weather Mr. Riley asked the apartment owner/management to install a smoke detector prior to the fire. I find it had to imagine that Mr. Riley, an electrician, didn’t notice the apartment was not equipped with a smoke detector. What a horrible tragedy!
The point is that all apartment building should have smoke detectors installed by the owners period. If you lost your family you would sue. The article did not say how long they were residents.
Ageed Scott, lastbat and anon. This is your typical deep pocket entitlement suit because there is no such thing as personal responsibility or accountibility.
Well, Gene is correct in that the landlord should have installed smoke detectors in all apartments, but then the tenants should be responsible for putting the batteries in. BUT, once again, how does a smoke detector prevent a fire? I guess this comes down to where the fire originated, how it originated and if having a smoke detector in the apt would have made a difference. Once again, IJ is right on top of the story with only limited tidbits of information to go on.
As far as I know there is no statute or building code that requires smoke detectors in apartment buildings or any other buildings. That goes for Section 8 housing as well. I’ve defended a lot of similar cases where it is always alleged that the landlord should have installed smoke detectors. And in cases where the smoke detectors are in place the landlord should have made sure fresh batteries were always in place and that the smoke detectors were operational. From the perspective of the landlord it’s a can’t-win situation. I agree that smoke detectors cannot prevent fires, but if an alarm is sounded they can save lives by waking up sleeping individuals and allowing them time to get out of a burning building. All those available defenses aside, however, this is a very appealing case from the perspective of the jury since two children were killed in the fire. For that reason alone the lawsuit, whether you think it’s appropriate or not, does have some legs.
Of course you would sue? Really, can $52M help you to get over the loss of your family?
While I agree that there should have been smoke detectors, that 99.9% of insurance companies that write apartment polices require hard wired smoke detectors in all units, and that it is a tragedy, I do not see how suing the building owner after the fact will make any difference. Why was this not a concern to him before the fire?
It is a persons responsibility to protect their own family especially in situations where others (in this case the building owner) are not looking out for their safety
This is a sad tragedy, and one that should have been prevented. As an electrician, he certainly has the experience to install a smoke detector. Just because they were tenants does not negate their personal responsibility for the safety of the family. You can’t always blame others for mistakes and expect to become a millionaire as a result of it.
I can come home from a weeekend trip only to be told that the alarm outside our bedroom was beeping for the last three days. Just because its there doesn’t mean my engineer wife will change a dead battery.
I’ve always wondered if I came out of a six-month coma, how many burned out bulbs would there be, or how tall the grass was, or how long the sidewalk hadn’t been shoveled. And this in ahouse with two teenagers and a great working wife.
In fact, thats why I keep my secret stuff in the closet with the lawn bags, screwdrivers and spare light bulbs. I know no one would ever go in there.
Of course, my wife comes back from trips to find formerly-fresh food in the fridge and boxes of Mac and Cheese in the trash. I just learned that she keeps the spare emergency $20 in the fruit crisper drawer.
So I guess we’re all subject to needing a little oversight. But the tenant has to be able to know that a battery-powered smoke alarm isn’t just a source of power for his portable electronic gadgets. That’s what a lot of my habitational clients claim – somebody needs to design a signle-purpose battery for use in detectors/alarms that won’t work on anything else.
Actually, it depends on where you live. Some states DO require landlords to provide working smoke alarms upon move in, but it is the tenant’s responsibility to maintain and test the alarms.
This is a terrible tragedy, and no, there is no way to really know if a smoke alarm would have saved the people’s lives or not. They would most likely have had a better chance, however.
The renter SHOULD have given written notice to the manager that he wanted an alarm installed within a limited time period or he would purchase one, install it, and deduct the price, plus labor, from his rent.
I agree all buildings should have smoke detectors and I would file suit if I lost my family or even my favorite chair. But I would also make sure my family never slept in an unprotected apartment, house or even hotel room. Ever spring and fall I would replace the batteries and every month I’d check that the detectors were operational, just like I do now. I also clean the lint from the dryer after every load.
Although I am not a fan of lawsuit/lottery, are we missing the fact that due to the gross negligence of the lanlord that “allegedly” only 3 of the 12 apartments had smoke detectors. They do not put out fires but they can give you a fighting chance to stay alive.
There is no gross negligence here. Setting aside the sympathy for the people who perished, we need to consider “proximate cause” and the absence of a smoke alarm isn’t it. As of this writing it’s still under investigation but………here are some known facts. These people lived in a basement apartment of a three story row house. All tenants of the other 12 apartments managed to escape without injury. Bear in mind only 3 of them has smoke detectors. The decedents were burned beyond recognition by what is described as a “fast moving blaze”. I doubt a faulty heating unit was the cause. Smoking? Candle? Arson? I wonder if the police are looking at the only person who survived this. With the exception of one miss-guided soul, everyone seems to agree this could and should have been prevented if the plaintiff didn’t try to save a few bucks by not buying his own smoke alarm. Most city fire departments will give them away free for the asking. It may also be a case of the plaintiff and his girlfriend being too stupid to realize the need for basic safety measures. People always look to blame someone else for their own stupidity and bad decisions.
What the report problably doesn’t show is that the apartment was originally a house from the 20’s, converted in the 60’s, had Bus fuses rated at 20 Amps, and more extension cords than an octopus colony has arms.
And this clown is an electrician? Pray he doesnt work on YOUR house.
Good points. All things considered, it doesn’t look like a there is any negligence but as someone aptly pointed out, the sympathy factor will probably cause some money to be paid. The pltf. This area is predominantly black as is the plft. so there will be jury considerations. (before anybody jumps on that as a racist comment is isn’t meant to be…..it’s just a fact that has to be factored into every suit strategy)
Didn’t claims guy just say that his comments were not meant to be racist? Please do not get the pot stirred up!
Claims guy,
Wouldn’t negligence be on the plaintiff’s part as contributory or culpable negligence? I agree that all deaths were tragic but some of the blame has to be placed on him. Also aren’t there Hispanics in this neighborhood? We don’t know for sure what the plaintiff’s ethnicity is.
Who Cares: we know for a fact the ethnicity of the plaintiff from his photo in the newspaper. We also know the neighborhood. There are no Mexican restaurants there.
After a little surfing I determined the following:
1. The woman who died was an Army veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan. That alone should silence both the Republicans and Democrats amongst us – especially those who like me didn’t care to enlist.
2. The couple had actually been together for 18 years and only recently after her return from Iraq did they decide to tie the knot – which in and of itself the commitment should be celebrated. Did he help raise their kids while she was away serving?
3. Per Google Earth the area doesnt look that rundown at all – its a decent relatively recent lowrise apartment complex with a fair amount of open space. So they’re not in the slum we thought.
4. OK, maybe the plaintiffs comment of “Since I took a great loss, somebody’s got to pay for it,” Riley said. “I will always feel pain.” was a little wrong, and a little off the mark, but I can understand the pain, or at least sympathize
with him. I’ve volunteered in chursh-run homeless shelters, and his feelings are neither insignificant nor unusual.
If he is wrong on any count its the deep pocket thing. But what a way to make a statement about apartment safety.
Here are the relevant sections of the Baltimore City Fire Codes, found through a search engine:
GENERAL:
Each sleeping area in a residential occupancy (includes all buildings designed to provide sleeping accommodations, such as 1 and 2-family dwellings, apartment buildings, hotels, motels, dormitories, rooming houses, etc.) must be provided with at least one approved smoke detector installed in a manner and location approved by the Chief of the Fire Department or his representative. The detector must provide an alarm suitable to warn the occupants.
INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE:
In all other rental occupancies (OTHER THAN 1, 2 OR 3 FAMILY BUILDINGS), the landlord is responsible for installing the smoke detector and, upon notice in person or upon written notice by certified mail from the tenant, the landlord is responsible for repair or replacement of the detector. If tenant personally notifies landlord of a mechanical failure, landlord must give tenant a written receipt acknowledging the notification.
Tenant may not remove a smoke detector or make it inoperative.
What an idiotic statement! I hope and pray you aren’t out in any community writing insurance because you are too stupid to know what liability means. The woman was not on welfare but if she was so what. Three lives were lost because the landlord broke the law.
Okay, so we’ve established some negligence on the part of the landlord. We’ve also established that the tenant should have been proactive in this, but will not be required to by a jury. Since the landlord did break the law he should pay some. I still don’t believe the plaintiff (one ‘f’ or two in that?) should be set for life because of it. I don’t know what a human life is worth – especially one I love – but as a jury member I would never support that amount.
Nobody’s questioning the decency of these people, just their poor judgement and personal negligence. I’ve personally investigated and handled dozens of these types of general liability claims over the years and I can tell you there’a always more to the story.
This case will be judged on comparative negligence. We agree that there should have been a smoke alarm. Even when there was a smoke alarm, in at least 50% of the cases the tenant either removed the battery because the alarm sounded when they were cooking, or they failed to replace the battery. It’s called personal responsibility which has been pretty much dismissed by the general public and the courts. Most of the time, liability takes a back seat to the issue of who has the money to pay.
Much speculation will be eliminated once the cause has been determined. If it was tenant negligence, the complexion of the liability changes significantly. Even if there was a smoke alarm, that doesn’t guarantee the outcome would have been different. The fact that the fire spread so fast and was so severe to burn them beyond recognition makes me wonder what fueled it. And why did the rest of the building manage to escape unharmed when only 3 of 12 units had alarms?
On the issue of why would people are “together” for 18 years but not married, in many cases it’s because they can get ADC (aid to dependent children) payments from Uncle Sam if they aren’t. That doesn’t make them bad people, just ones who look for something for nothing.
As for comparative/contributory, would the Fire Department also have an exposure for a faulty inspection of an apartment building that did not uncover missing alarms?
I also found that the unit was in the basement – hence the major damage and loss of life. Little chance for escape, and who knows how many exits there were from the unit.
Some quotes from the web:
Ellin says the motivation in this case was more than just money. It is to alert others that state law mandates smoke detectors in apartment buildings.
“The management company is responsible for placing the smoke detectors, and that was not done in this case,” said Ellin.
“I took a great loss, but someone’s got to pay for it. Like my attorney said, landlords around the county need to know that they need smoke detectors,” Ron Riley said.
End of quotes
Someone needs to tell plaintiff that he should have notified landlord about the missing unit and that he would have been responsible for batteries etc., which when he didn’t think to check them, should have alerted him to the lack of alarms.
On the ADC factor, I have a young couple that are in the same situation – been together a little over two years. You also get free education as far I know a two year degree. Go figure.
If you are referring to my comment Gene, you are the idiot. Go die. If she wasn’t on welfare it would be the only woman in inner city Baltimore that isn’t.
Actually PA, it does make them bad people. These arre people who have the resources to pay for their own kids yet use a loophole to avoid doing so thereby rendering them crooks.
NOT TRUE. I used to rent and we bought the smoke detectors ourselves. One day the landlord noticed and remimbursed me for the detector and the batteries when I replaced them….and yes I REPLACED THEM, not the landlord. I was concerned and was looking out for MY family as he should have been, since he was an electrician!!!
Agree w/you Stat Man. The speed and intensity of this fire coupled with the severe burning of the bodies suggests arson, and probably not a random act. It would be interesting to learn the cause and point of origin. Hopefully the cops are investigating Riley for this. Would like to know why he wasn’t around for his pregnant buddy at 3:00am and if was home, why is he only one who made it out?
This whole situation is a tragedy and I would probably sue to. However, if I were concerned with the lack of smoke detectors I would do one of two things:
1)Contact the landlord to get one put in.
or
2)Buy one myself and install it.
I also have a question, how many of you even thought about fire safety before reading this article? Do you all have operational smoke detectors? Do you change the batteries frequently and do you test them frequently? The biggest misconception with just about anything, and this comes down to just plain ignorance, is “It won’t happen to me”. This last statement is actually the true reason why most people don’t protect themselves and probably one of the reasons why this tragedy occurred. To call these people crooks for maybe abusing the system, that point is completely irrelevant. What if they legitimately were on welfare or ADC would your opinion change, probably not. Mainly because you are not in that situation and you couldn’t even remotely relate to it. To that I say, SHUTUP! Their financial situation has nothing to do with this. Personally, I don’t think that smoke detectors would’ve have saved their lives anyway. Reason being is because a hot, fast fire doesn’t produce a lot of smoke (in the beginning) and consumes our oxygen at a very, very fast pace. My guess is that they died of asphiciation, which is the biggest cause for deaths in open flame fires, before realizing their was a fire anyway. They would’ve needed a heat detector to help give them an early enough warning to get out safely. I have been installing smoke detectors and heat alarms for about a year now and it is crucial to get both. Not to say the smoke detectors don’t save lives but in an open flame fire they are pretty much useless.
Brian: We agree that the smoke alarm issue is probably moot in this case. Absent any negligence on the part of the landlord, why would you file a suit?
PA – I would only sue if I could prove that due to the negligence of someone else, my family suffered. I wouldn’t sue for the sake of suing, that to me is one thing wrong with this country. I do however, believe in justice and sometimes a suit is the best way to go about it. I think this suit was filed because of the emotions that go with this tragedy and for him to defer the blame onto someone else and not himself. Not to say that there isn’t some nobility to this suit but it certainly doesn’t apply for the whole thing. I do agree that personal accountability and responsibility are definitely issues here, but it comes back to what I said earlier. They probably didn’t think it was going to happen to them and therefore took no measures to protect what, supposedly, was important to him. Although some people do bring up a good point, why is he the only survivor? What was he doing when this happened? I think these are valid questions and I hope that the police or fire dept. take a good look at this. I certainly hope that he didn’t do this on purpose, that would make me sick. Especially since I am a father or a 2 year old boy.
It’S ALWAYS about the money and if a plaintiff or pltf atty ever tries to deny it they are COMPLETE liars. If it’s not about the money then why sue? Why not ask for an apology for your “closure”? Oh that’s right cause the $50M will really give them “closure”.
TO Mary B:
Do you think that he should’ve pursued criminal charges? It does appears that the landlord did break the law. Would you only seek an apology? How would you handle this situation? Me personally, I am not sure how I would handle it and I pray to God that I never have to.
Not sure how I would handle it if I was in this situation but I am not so the question is moot. This guy is lying saying it’s not about the money but it IS about the money. I ‘m just pointing out his lie. Why sue if it’s not about the money or sue for $1.
Since they’re not married the male’s occupation and earnings are moot. They aren’t a factor in ADC. Since the female returned from military duty, she’s probably unemployed. She qualifies.
I agree with the comments that it’s all about money. No personal injury attorney working on a contingent fee would take a case for $1.00 or an apology. They prefer to “mine” human misery and misfortune. I always considered them financial vampires.
You have made me contrite, Brian. You are right. The economics do not matter. Anyway with this case, it will all come out in the wash, as my grandmother used to say. If this guy has alterior motives he’ll answer either on earth or at the judgment. Either way the lives lost are what moves me the most.
I’ve read most of the responces here and I’ve thought about what I’d do. I’ve always been totally against the “lawsuit way of life” that it seems like our country has evolved into. It does seem like it is some type of lottery. My and my wife have discussed this numerous times and both say that we think law suits are wrong and that we wouldn’t do this. However, the more I think about it, if I had to suffer such a terrible trajedy as this, I believe that I would probably sue. It is apparant that the apartment owner was negligent and his neglignece led to this man losing all that he holds dear. I’d sue under this particular set of circumstances.
I guess he couldn’t spare $10 to buy one of his own…
How does a smoke detector prevent fire? I have several in my home and they only tell me when there is smoke – after a fire has already started. Smoke detectors don’t even put out a fire. I’m all for them, but this suit seems like another entitlement suit.
The article fails to mention weather Mr. Riley asked the apartment owner/management to install a smoke detector prior to the fire. I find it had to imagine that Mr. Riley, an electrician, didn’t notice the apartment was not equipped with a smoke detector. What a horrible tragedy!
The point is that all apartment building should have smoke detectors installed by the owners period. If you lost your family you would sue. The article did not say how long they were residents.
Ageed Scott, lastbat and anon. This is your typical deep pocket entitlement suit because there is no such thing as personal responsibility or accountibility.
Well, Gene is correct in that the landlord should have installed smoke detectors in all apartments, but then the tenants should be responsible for putting the batteries in. BUT, once again, how does a smoke detector prevent a fire? I guess this comes down to where the fire originated, how it originated and if having a smoke detector in the apt would have made a difference. Once again, IJ is right on top of the story with only limited tidbits of information to go on.
Does building or fired dept. code require the building owner of rental units to have an operating smoke detector in place?
That is really the key to this article.
On basis of compassion they should install them, BUT, if they are not legally mandated then the suit is baseless.
As far as I know there is no statute or building code that requires smoke detectors in apartment buildings or any other buildings. That goes for Section 8 housing as well. I’ve defended a lot of similar cases where it is always alleged that the landlord should have installed smoke detectors. And in cases where the smoke detectors are in place the landlord should have made sure fresh batteries were always in place and that the smoke detectors were operational. From the perspective of the landlord it’s a can’t-win situation. I agree that smoke detectors cannot prevent fires, but if an alarm is sounded they can save lives by waking up sleeping individuals and allowing them time to get out of a burning building. All those available defenses aside, however, this is a very appealing case from the perspective of the jury since two children were killed in the fire. For that reason alone the lawsuit, whether you think it’s appropriate or not, does have some legs.
Claimant is an electrician!!!! And he didn’t think that he might want to install a fire alarm???????????????? Give me a break…
Of course you would sue? Really, can $52M help you to get over the loss of your family?
While I agree that there should have been smoke detectors, that 99.9% of insurance companies that write apartment polices require hard wired smoke detectors in all units, and that it is a tragedy, I do not see how suing the building owner after the fact will make any difference. Why was this not a concern to him before the fire?
It is a persons responsibility to protect their own family especially in situations where others (in this case the building owner) are not looking out for their safety
This is a sad tragedy, and one that should have been prevented. As an electrician, he certainly has the experience to install a smoke detector. Just because they were tenants does not negate their personal responsibility for the safety of the family. You can’t always blame others for mistakes and expect to become a millionaire as a result of it.
I can come home from a weeekend trip only to be told that the alarm outside our bedroom was beeping for the last three days. Just because its there doesn’t mean my engineer wife will change a dead battery.
I’ve always wondered if I came out of a six-month coma, how many burned out bulbs would there be, or how tall the grass was, or how long the sidewalk hadn’t been shoveled. And this in ahouse with two teenagers and a great working wife.
In fact, thats why I keep my secret stuff in the closet with the lawn bags, screwdrivers and spare light bulbs. I know no one would ever go in there.
Of course, my wife comes back from trips to find formerly-fresh food in the fridge and boxes of Mac and Cheese in the trash. I just learned that she keeps the spare emergency $20 in the fruit crisper drawer.
So I guess we’re all subject to needing a little oversight. But the tenant has to be able to know that a battery-powered smoke alarm isn’t just a source of power for his portable electronic gadgets. That’s what a lot of my habitational clients claim – somebody needs to design a signle-purpose battery for use in detectors/alarms that won’t work on anything else.
Actually, it depends on where you live. Some states DO require landlords to provide working smoke alarms upon move in, but it is the tenant’s responsibility to maintain and test the alarms.
This is a terrible tragedy, and no, there is no way to really know if a smoke alarm would have saved the people’s lives or not. They would most likely have had a better chance, however.
The renter SHOULD have given written notice to the manager that he wanted an alarm installed within a limited time period or he would purchase one, install it, and deduct the price, plus labor, from his rent.
I agree all buildings should have smoke detectors and I would file suit if I lost my family or even my favorite chair. But I would also make sure my family never slept in an unprotected apartment, house or even hotel room. Ever spring and fall I would replace the batteries and every month I’d check that the detectors were operational, just like I do now. I also clean the lint from the dryer after every load.
Although I am not a fan of lawsuit/lottery, are we missing the fact that due to the gross negligence of the lanlord that “allegedly” only 3 of the 12 apartments had smoke detectors. They do not put out fires but they can give you a fighting chance to stay alive.
There is no gross negligence here. Setting aside the sympathy for the people who perished, we need to consider “proximate cause” and the absence of a smoke alarm isn’t it. As of this writing it’s still under investigation but………here are some known facts. These people lived in a basement apartment of a three story row house. All tenants of the other 12 apartments managed to escape without injury. Bear in mind only 3 of them has smoke detectors. The decedents were burned beyond recognition by what is described as a “fast moving blaze”. I doubt a faulty heating unit was the cause. Smoking? Candle? Arson? I wonder if the police are looking at the only person who survived this. With the exception of one miss-guided soul, everyone seems to agree this could and should have been prevented if the plaintiff didn’t try to save a few bucks by not buying his own smoke alarm. Most city fire departments will give them away free for the asking. It may also be a case of the plaintiff and his girlfriend being too stupid to realize the need for basic safety measures. People always look to blame someone else for their own stupidity and bad decisions.
What the report problably doesn’t show is that the apartment was originally a house from the 20’s, converted in the 60’s, had Bus fuses rated at 20 Amps, and more extension cords than an octopus colony has arms.
And this clown is an electrician? Pray he doesnt work on YOUR house.
Good points. All things considered, it doesn’t look like a there is any negligence but as someone aptly pointed out, the sympathy factor will probably cause some money to be paid. The pltf. This area is predominantly black as is the plft. so there will be jury considerations. (before anybody jumps on that as a racist comment is isn’t meant to be…..it’s just a fact that has to be factored into every suit strategy)
I’m sure his “fiance” and her kids were on welfare, he should have had more than enough money to buy one on his own.
Didn’t claims guy just say that his comments were not meant to be racist? Please do not get the pot stirred up!
Claims guy,
Wouldn’t negligence be on the plaintiff’s part as contributory or culpable negligence? I agree that all deaths were tragic but some of the blame has to be placed on him. Also aren’t there Hispanics in this neighborhood? We don’t know for sure what the plaintiff’s ethnicity is.
Who Cares: we know for a fact the ethnicity of the plaintiff from his photo in the newspaper. We also know the neighborhood. There are no Mexican restaurants there.
After a little surfing I determined the following:
1. The woman who died was an Army veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan. That alone should silence both the Republicans and Democrats amongst us – especially those who like me didn’t care to enlist.
2. The couple had actually been together for 18 years and only recently after her return from Iraq did they decide to tie the knot – which in and of itself the commitment should be celebrated. Did he help raise their kids while she was away serving?
3. Per Google Earth the area doesnt look that rundown at all – its a decent relatively recent lowrise apartment complex with a fair amount of open space. So they’re not in the slum we thought.
4. OK, maybe the plaintiffs comment of “Since I took a great loss, somebody’s got to pay for it,” Riley said. “I will always feel pain.” was a little wrong, and a little off the mark, but I can understand the pain, or at least sympathize
with him. I’ve volunteered in chursh-run homeless shelters, and his feelings are neither insignificant nor unusual.
If he is wrong on any count its the deep pocket thing. But what a way to make a statement about apartment safety.
I just went to the Baltimore Sun webiste and the article IJ posted was the same as the article written by the Sun…
even the updated version didn’t give information as to how the fire started, if Maryland REQUIRES smoke detectors in all apartment buildings.
If the fire was started by one of the tenants (not saying they did it on purpose) would the landlord still be at fault regardless of smoke detector?
Here are the relevant sections of the Baltimore City Fire Codes, found through a search engine:
GENERAL:
Each sleeping area in a residential occupancy (includes all buildings designed to provide sleeping accommodations, such as 1 and 2-family dwellings, apartment buildings, hotels, motels, dormitories, rooming houses, etc.) must be provided with at least one approved smoke detector installed in a manner and location approved by the Chief of the Fire Department or his representative. The detector must provide an alarm suitable to warn the occupants.
INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE:
In all other rental occupancies (OTHER THAN 1, 2 OR 3 FAMILY BUILDINGS), the landlord is responsible for installing the smoke detector and, upon notice in person or upon written notice by certified mail from the tenant, the landlord is responsible for repair or replacement of the detector. If tenant personally notifies landlord of a mechanical failure, landlord must give tenant a written receipt acknowledging the notification.
Tenant may not remove a smoke detector or make it inoperative.
What an idiotic statement! I hope and pray you aren’t out in any community writing insurance because you are too stupid to know what liability means. The woman was not on welfare but if she was so what. Three lives were lost because the landlord broke the law.
Okay, so we’ve established some negligence on the part of the landlord. We’ve also established that the tenant should have been proactive in this, but will not be required to by a jury. Since the landlord did break the law he should pay some. I still don’t believe the plaintiff (one ‘f’ or two in that?) should be set for life because of it. I don’t know what a human life is worth – especially one I love – but as a jury member I would never support that amount.
Thanks for the info, JAWG. The International Building Code and International Residential Code also require smoke alarms in all residential units.
Nobody’s questioning the decency of these people, just their poor judgement and personal negligence. I’ve personally investigated and handled dozens of these types of general liability claims over the years and I can tell you there’a always more to the story.
This case will be judged on comparative negligence. We agree that there should have been a smoke alarm. Even when there was a smoke alarm, in at least 50% of the cases the tenant either removed the battery because the alarm sounded when they were cooking, or they failed to replace the battery. It’s called personal responsibility which has been pretty much dismissed by the general public and the courts. Most of the time, liability takes a back seat to the issue of who has the money to pay.
Much speculation will be eliminated once the cause has been determined. If it was tenant negligence, the complexion of the liability changes significantly. Even if there was a smoke alarm, that doesn’t guarantee the outcome would have been different. The fact that the fire spread so fast and was so severe to burn them beyond recognition makes me wonder what fueled it. And why did the rest of the building manage to escape unharmed when only 3 of 12 units had alarms?
On the issue of why would people are “together” for 18 years but not married, in many cases it’s because they can get ADC (aid to dependent children) payments from Uncle Sam if they aren’t. That doesn’t make them bad people, just ones who look for something for nothing.
As for comparative/contributory, would the Fire Department also have an exposure for a faulty inspection of an apartment building that did not uncover missing alarms?
I also found that the unit was in the basement – hence the major damage and loss of life. Little chance for escape, and who knows how many exits there were from the unit.
Some quotes from the web:
Ellin says the motivation in this case was more than just money. It is to alert others that state law mandates smoke detectors in apartment buildings.
“The management company is responsible for placing the smoke detectors, and that was not done in this case,” said Ellin.
“I took a great loss, but someone’s got to pay for it. Like my attorney said, landlords around the county need to know that they need smoke detectors,” Ron Riley said.
End of quotes
Someone needs to tell plaintiff that he should have notified landlord about the missing unit and that he would have been responsible for batteries etc., which when he didn’t think to check them, should have alerted him to the lack of alarms.
Great points, PA.
On the ADC factor, I have a young couple that are in the same situation – been together a little over two years. You also get free education as far I know a two year degree. Go figure.
If you are referring to my comment Gene, you are the idiot. Go die. If she wasn’t on welfare it would be the only woman in inner city Baltimore that isn’t.
Actually PA, it does make them bad people. These arre people who have the resources to pay for their own kids yet use a loophole to avoid doing so thereby rendering them crooks.
NOT TRUE. I used to rent and we bought the smoke detectors ourselves. One day the landlord noticed and remimbursed me for the detector and the batteries when I replaced them….and yes I REPLACED THEM, not the landlord. I was concerned and was looking out for MY family as he should have been, since he was an electrician!!!
One more comment: OK, someone’s got to pay, why not start with Ron Riley????
The guy is an electrician and his girlfriend was a returned Iraq war veteran so I doubt if they would qualify for ADC. Read the whole post.
Agree w/you Stat Man. The speed and intensity of this fire coupled with the severe burning of the bodies suggests arson, and probably not a random act. It would be interesting to learn the cause and point of origin. Hopefully the cops are investigating Riley for this. Would like to know why he wasn’t around for his pregnant buddy at 3:00am and if was home, why is he only one who made it out?
This whole situation is a tragedy and I would probably sue to. However, if I were concerned with the lack of smoke detectors I would do one of two things:
1)Contact the landlord to get one put in.
or
2)Buy one myself and install it.
I also have a question, how many of you even thought about fire safety before reading this article? Do you all have operational smoke detectors? Do you change the batteries frequently and do you test them frequently? The biggest misconception with just about anything, and this comes down to just plain ignorance, is “It won’t happen to me”. This last statement is actually the true reason why most people don’t protect themselves and probably one of the reasons why this tragedy occurred. To call these people crooks for maybe abusing the system, that point is completely irrelevant. What if they legitimately were on welfare or ADC would your opinion change, probably not. Mainly because you are not in that situation and you couldn’t even remotely relate to it. To that I say, SHUTUP! Their financial situation has nothing to do with this. Personally, I don’t think that smoke detectors would’ve have saved their lives anyway. Reason being is because a hot, fast fire doesn’t produce a lot of smoke (in the beginning) and consumes our oxygen at a very, very fast pace. My guess is that they died of asphiciation, which is the biggest cause for deaths in open flame fires, before realizing their was a fire anyway. They would’ve needed a heat detector to help give them an early enough warning to get out safely. I have been installing smoke detectors and heat alarms for about a year now and it is crucial to get both. Not to say the smoke detectors don’t save lives but in an open flame fire they are pretty much useless.
Brian: We agree that the smoke alarm issue is probably moot in this case. Absent any negligence on the part of the landlord, why would you file a suit?
PA – I would only sue if I could prove that due to the negligence of someone else, my family suffered. I wouldn’t sue for the sake of suing, that to me is one thing wrong with this country. I do however, believe in justice and sometimes a suit is the best way to go about it. I think this suit was filed because of the emotions that go with this tragedy and for him to defer the blame onto someone else and not himself. Not to say that there isn’t some nobility to this suit but it certainly doesn’t apply for the whole thing. I do agree that personal accountability and responsibility are definitely issues here, but it comes back to what I said earlier. They probably didn’t think it was going to happen to them and therefore took no measures to protect what, supposedly, was important to him. Although some people do bring up a good point, why is he the only survivor? What was he doing when this happened? I think these are valid questions and I hope that the police or fire dept. take a good look at this. I certainly hope that he didn’t do this on purpose, that would make me sick. Especially since I am a father or a 2 year old boy.
“of” I meant to say of a 2 year old boy. I hate it when I do stuff like that.
It’S ALWAYS about the money and if a plaintiff or pltf atty ever tries to deny it they are COMPLETE liars. If it’s not about the money then why sue? Why not ask for an apology for your “closure”? Oh that’s right cause the $50M will really give them “closure”.
TO Mary B:
Do you think that he should’ve pursued criminal charges? It does appears that the landlord did break the law. Would you only seek an apology? How would you handle this situation? Me personally, I am not sure how I would handle it and I pray to God that I never have to.
Not sure how I would handle it if I was in this situation but I am not so the question is moot. This guy is lying saying it’s not about the money but it IS about the money. I ‘m just pointing out his lie. Why sue if it’s not about the money or sue for $1.
Since they’re not married the male’s occupation and earnings are moot. They aren’t a factor in ADC. Since the female returned from military duty, she’s probably unemployed. She qualifies.
I agree with the comments that it’s all about money. No personal injury attorney working on a contingent fee would take a case for $1.00 or an apology. They prefer to “mine” human misery and misfortune. I always considered them financial vampires.
You have made me contrite, Brian. You are right. The economics do not matter. Anyway with this case, it will all come out in the wash, as my grandmother used to say. If this guy has alterior motives he’ll answer either on earth or at the judgment. Either way the lives lost are what moves me the most.
I’ve read most of the responces here and I’ve thought about what I’d do. I’ve always been totally against the “lawsuit way of life” that it seems like our country has evolved into. It does seem like it is some type of lottery. My and my wife have discussed this numerous times and both say that we think law suits are wrong and that we wouldn’t do this. However, the more I think about it, if I had to suffer such a terrible trajedy as this, I believe that I would probably sue. It is apparant that the apartment owner was negligent and his neglignece led to this man losing all that he holds dear. I’d sue under this particular set of circumstances.