Sliding down any slide headfirst may be fatal whether the slide collapses or not. Obviously comparative or contributory negligence on the part of the deceased was not taken into account here.
The slide was designed for children, however, the box the slide comes in only mentioned something on the side about being for children 3 and above. I guess the next thing we will see is ‘For Children Three and Above, but not to exceed age Eleven or 100 pounds’.
As mentioned above, most of the slides do contain wording that states sliding headfirst is not advised. Sometimes I believe there should be an ‘idiot’ law. If you are dumb enough to go down a slide, meant for CHILDREN, and do so head first as an ADULT, I have a hard time feeling sorry for you.
confused… she went head first on a slide and it collapsed… but the slide would have been over the water… how did she managed to hit the pool deck? how high was the slide over the pool? most inflateable slides are meant for little ones. was there an age limit set on the slide or was it designed for family use? sounds to me like something is missing or the story that was given to the judge was incomplete but err’d on the plaintiff. what is interesting in some articles it states she suffered neck injuries, but then i read another article it states a fatal injury. so i am confused, if fatal, she would be dead…
Horrible situation but the damages at $20,000,000 seem to be way out of line with any kind of logic for the circustances unless this lady supported a huge financial enterprise.
Maybe people should only be allowed to sue for however much life insurance they have on themselves…….after all that’s how much the value their own life.
I dislike the two people who disliked your comment. Could you imagine how many silly lawsuits would go away if this were enforced? I think it’s a great idea! And I only have a $10,000 life insurance policy!
Courtney, Do you really dislike people for disagreeing with a comment? If yes, I’ll try not to take it to heart. Of more concern, do you truly feel your life is only worth $10,000? If someone needed a vital organ, like a liver…and they killed you for it. Would you be okay with $10,000 restitution to your next of kin. I can totally see why you might only have $10,000 in life insurance. Perhaps you don’t have outstanding commitments and you just want to finance a burial. But I can’t see how $10,000 could be the value of you life. I think you’re selling yourself short.
JBC there are many reasons people do not or cannot carry the life insurance required to finance the obligations or plans they have for those they leave behind when they die prematurely. At the same time, not everyone needs life insurance to finance their goals. In either case, it doesn’t mean they don’t value their life.
Reason #756 why there should be a minimum IQ requirement for serving on a jury. Was this the same bunch of bozos who awarded that woman a fortune for spilling McDonalds coffee in her own lap? Undoubtedly these jurors will still complain when prices of products they buy and their insurance premiums increase… Unbelievable.
18 Million of the $20,000,000 is punative. The issue is that the slide (manufactured in China) was not even tested to see if it met US standards. The defense seems to have been that since the slide was inflatable it did not need to meet the standards.
I personally have a concern with punative damages. It seems to me that the standard should be more like the criminal standard of beyond a reasonable doubt than the civil standard of preponderance of evidence. In this case in particular there seems to be substantial wrong-doing by both parties.
That does not sound like a very good defense.
Sliding down any slide headfirst may be fatal whether the slide collapses or not. Obviously comparative or contributory negligence on the part of the deceased was not taken into account here.
I think I remember reading about the original case. I seem to remember that the slide was designed for children.
The slide was designed for children, however, the box the slide comes in only mentioned something on the side about being for children 3 and above. I guess the next thing we will see is ‘For Children Three and Above, but not to exceed age Eleven or 100 pounds’.
As mentioned above, most of the slides do contain wording that states sliding headfirst is not advised. Sometimes I believe there should be an ‘idiot’ law. If you are dumb enough to go down a slide, meant for CHILDREN, and do so head first as an ADULT, I have a hard time feeling sorry for you.
I don’t necessarily know what type of slide it is…but the “slip and slides” available in the Northeast to say not to exceed age XX or XXX pounds.
confused… she went head first on a slide and it collapsed… but the slide would have been over the water… how did she managed to hit the pool deck? how high was the slide over the pool? most inflateable slides are meant for little ones. was there an age limit set on the slide or was it designed for family use? sounds to me like something is missing or the story that was given to the judge was incomplete but err’d on the plaintiff. what is interesting in some articles it states she suffered neck injuries, but then i read another article it states a fatal injury. so i am confused, if fatal, she would be dead…
Horrible situation but the damages at $20,000,000 seem to be way out of line with any kind of logic for the circustances unless this lady supported a huge financial enterprise.
Maybe people should only be allowed to sue for however much life insurance they have on themselves…….after all that’s how much the value their own life.
I dislike the two people who disliked your comment. Could you imagine how many silly lawsuits would go away if this were enforced? I think it’s a great idea! And I only have a $10,000 life insurance policy!
Courtney, Do you really dislike people for disagreeing with a comment? If yes, I’ll try not to take it to heart. Of more concern, do you truly feel your life is only worth $10,000? If someone needed a vital organ, like a liver…and they killed you for it. Would you be okay with $10,000 restitution to your next of kin. I can totally see why you might only have $10,000 in life insurance. Perhaps you don’t have outstanding commitments and you just want to finance a burial. But I can’t see how $10,000 could be the value of you life. I think you’re selling yourself short.
JBC there are many reasons people do not or cannot carry the life insurance required to finance the obligations or plans they have for those they leave behind when they die prematurely. At the same time, not everyone needs life insurance to finance their goals. In either case, it doesn’t mean they don’t value their life.
Reason #756 why there should be a minimum IQ requirement for serving on a jury. Was this the same bunch of bozos who awarded that woman a fortune for spilling McDonalds coffee in her own lap? Undoubtedly these jurors will still complain when prices of products they buy and their insurance premiums increase… Unbelievable.
The article in IJ is somewhat sparse in terms of the facts in the case and the verdict. If you look at
http://www.attorneys.com/products-liability/family-receives-twenty-million-in-wrongful-death-suit/?id=undefined
18 Million of the $20,000,000 is punative. The issue is that the slide (manufactured in China) was not even tested to see if it met US standards. The defense seems to have been that since the slide was inflatable it did not need to meet the standards.
I personally have a concern with punative damages. It seems to me that the standard should be more like the criminal standard of beyond a reasonable doubt than the civil standard of preponderance of evidence. In this case in particular there seems to be substantial wrong-doing by both parties.
At the risk of indicting all for the actions of a few bear in mind the venue is Massachusetts and it’s a lawyers world. Nice fees for all.