Jury Rules Disneyland Negligent in Ride Injury, No Damages Awarded

June 25, 2014

  • June 25, 2014 at 2:57 pm
    Mike Mansel says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 39
    Thumb down 0

    Good for Disneyland. It’s not too often the Courts take such a stand.

  • June 25, 2014 at 2:57 pm
    Crain says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 40
    Thumb down 0

    Anyone who has ever been in a boat knows that if you move any signficant weight, the boat will shift and move. 415 pounds probably qualifies as significant weight.

  • June 25, 2014 at 3:33 pm
    I agree with Disneyland says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 17
    Thumb down 0

    Pleased with the verdict also.

  • June 25, 2014 at 3:50 pm
    Don Quixote says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 37
    Thumb down 2

    It would be nice if this guy had to reimburse Disney’s insurance company for all the legal fees and costs it took to defend this BS lawsuit. Why the winner should have to pay while the loser walks away owing nothing (assuming his lawyer was working on contingency) is beyond me. The rule should be “loser pays” so the innocent victim of a bogus lawsuit doesn’t suffer a loss just to defend themselves.

  • June 25, 2014 at 4:22 pm
    txmouthbreatherboogereatertx says:
    Hot debate. What do you think?
    Thumb up 12
    Thumb down 8

    I bet if this guy wore a bra, he wouldn’t have an “existing back problem”

  • June 25, 2014 at 4:53 pm
    Fair Playing Field says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 23
    Thumb down 1

    It’s a fair world after all…

  • June 30, 2014 at 11:14 am
    Louie says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 13
    Thumb down 3

    I worked in an amusement park for 3 summers during college. Absolute blast.

    One of the rides I worked was the log flume. One time, there was a guy attempting to get his soaking wet (and unfortunately, rather overweight) wife out of the boat.

    He said, “Hey, can you give me a hand?”

    Without thinking, I said, “How about a shoe-horn?”

    The guy started dying laughing, and luckily his wife took it ok.

    I’m not proud of that moment.

  • July 2, 2014 at 3:46 pm
    MrInsBrokerCA says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I guess the facts gave this jury a clear understanding of the cause and effect in this accident. Not having read the transcript, speculation is pointless. We don’t know if the case was bogus, or only
    extremely inflated (no pun intended). Rather than an all of nothing imposition of legal fees on the
    loser, I think the judge or jury should make a determination of percentage to charge, so regardless of
    the verdict, a separate decision is made about whether the case ever had serious merit, and if it is found to be in essence manufactured for profit, then by all means make the loser pay the winner’s full legal costs as well as the court costs.

    It should be understood that just because a plaintiff loses, doesn’t mean they had no legitimate claims. There are many reasons to lose a case. As mandatory arbitration is a large portion of today’s
    legal cases, how many are aware that loser pays often is a major factor (as in a hammer) used to
    deter a valid plaintiff’s calim from going to trial or full arbitration decison? When forced with the
    added risk of losing $100K + if the arbitrator rules against you 51% to 49%, most plaintiffs who are
    not rich will bite the poison pill and settle. The case I’m referring to involved a contractor and breach or contract claim, which while totally different from the PI claim in this story, is still very common.

Add a Comment

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


More News
More News Features