Family of Man Killed by Sandy Tree Sues NYC

August 15, 2013

  • August 15, 2013 at 1:37 pm
    Scott says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 17
    Thumb down 0

    So……..who planted the tree near the house, the city or the homeowner (original or existing)? Good luck with that one!

  • August 15, 2013 at 2:01 pm
    Jay says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 16
    Thumb down 0

    Phone rings: NY City Attorny’s office, God Speaking may I help you with this claim?

  • August 15, 2013 at 2:10 pm
    mdagent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 8
    Thumb down 2

    They may have a case since it had been reported to the city that the tree was unsafe. Just saying…

  • August 15, 2013 at 2:15 pm
    reality bites says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 24
    Thumb down 0

    It’s not nice to sue Mother Nature…

  • August 15, 2013 at 2:57 pm
    sl says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 12
    Thumb down 1

    I have 2 city owned tree that needed attention. I called a tree trimmer to pay myself but when they came out they indicated they could not work on the city tree. I called the city and they verified that no contractor but one they hire can work on the trees. 2 years later the city finally trimmed them…so depending…

  • August 15, 2013 at 3:45 pm
    Original Bob says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 11
    Thumb down 0

    Another question that should be considered. Was the man in a house located in the area where evacuation was mandatory or highly recommended?

    • August 16, 2013 at 9:23 am
      Nebraskan says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 13
      Thumb down 0

      Original Bob, how does that work? If he was in a mandatory evacuation area, would that pretty much close the book on that lawsuit? Or is there wiggle room to argue around it? (As usual, I feel it is necessary to note that I am genuinely asking and these are not sarcastic questions meant to make the commenter above look inferior. I know how this crowd rolls, so I need to be explicit.)

      • August 16, 2013 at 11:31 am
        jw says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 6
        Thumb down 0

        Well, ya know, we do like a good fight.

        • August 16, 2013 at 1:36 pm
          Nebraskan says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 5
          Thumb down 0

          Probably because nothing else is going on for any of us…lol :)

          • August 16, 2013 at 1:51 pm
            jw says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 0

            Exactly! Fridays are the worst. Very slow here.

          • August 19, 2013 at 4:54 pm
            Nebraskan says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 0

            I meant in our personal lives. :)

      • August 16, 2013 at 12:58 pm
        Libby says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 0

        There’s ALWAYS wriggle room, N. He could argue he was not notified of a mandatory evacuation. But since he was laying on the couch when this happened and not huddled in a doorway or basement, I’m thinking there wasn’t a mandatory evacuation. But I could be wrong about that.

      • August 19, 2013 at 10:44 am
        caffiend says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 2
        Thumb down 0

        I assume that if he was in an evacuation area, it goes from the city’s (possible) responsibility to it falling on the responsibility of the person as an assumption of risk.

        Basically that translates to, “you shouldn’t have been there in the first place”

  • August 16, 2013 at 1:16 pm
    tiger says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 3
    Thumb down 1

    Good luck with this. Not a chance this lawsuit goes anywhere. Sovereign immunity to precedent to acts of God are all on NYC’s side.

  • August 16, 2013 at 3:55 pm
    Huh! says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 4
    Thumb down 0

    If a landlord can be held liable for a tenant’s injuries when mugged on the street, then the city can be held liable for whatever damage is caused when their tree falls over. They could do everything right and still wind up paying for this one.

    • August 19, 2013 at 2:11 pm
      InsGuy says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 3
      Thumb down 1

      Send a note to the IRS and tell them you are perfectly willing to contribute to windfall damages for people suing your city, county or state, cuz that’s basically what your saying.

      I’m sure they are plenty of valid & otherwise reasonable claims, but there x10000 that aren’t. Undue burden on taxpayers is the reason for these laws.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

More News
More News Features