Is the Law Stupid or are People Assholes Or What?

Azelma · **Posted:** Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:52 pm

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories ... saved.html

Quick story:

1. Woman crashes and is stuck screaming in a burning car (later it was discovered that it was a suicide attempt)
2. Two men driving by stop and run to go save the woman.
3. They rescue the woman from the burning car.
4. Now they are each suing her for $25,000 for injuries they sustained when rescuing her (lingering respiratory issues from smoke inhalation etc.).

Does this seem fair or right to you?

Usdk · **Posted:** Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:54 pm

frivolous lawsuits are frivolous.

they volunteered to go for it, they'll lose.

Azelma · **Posted:** Mon Aug 01, 2011 2:07 pm

Usdk wrote:

they volunteered to go for it, they'll lose.

I'm not so sure they will lose.

Quote:

A professor at Capital University Law School says this is no “man bites dog” story, that rescuers sue those they helped more often than people think.

“The precedent is clear: danger invites rescue ... and if you’ve acted recklessly or negligently and someone gets hurt rescuing you, you could be in trouble,” said Stan Darling, who teaches tort law and civil procedure at Capital.

Every state, including Ohio, has a “Good Samaritan” law that is intended to absolve rescuers from liability when they, in good faith, attempt to save someone. But when it comes to the protection of the people being aided, judges and lawyers look to a federally recognized tort law known as “the Rescue Doctrine,” Darling said.

It essentially says that, if the people being helped were negligent or reckless when they created real danger, there could be a chance to recover damages if the rescuers acted reasonably and can prove their injuries.

Necrachilles · **Posted:** Mon Aug 01, 2011 2:25 pm

The good samaritan law should just go both ways. If the samaritan is trying to help, he/she can't be sued nor can he/she sue you for injuries sustained during rescue attempt. It would be nice if the samaritanee offered up a nice quest reward for the save. Maybe some gold and a nice pair of plate leggings that I can wear or d/e at a time of my choosing.

Edit: To answer your question, the justice system is a complete joke.

Dvergar · **Posted:** Mon Aug 01, 2011 2:29 pm

Good thing we didn't have some kind of national healthcare system to take care of this.

Usdk · **Posted:** Mon Aug 01, 2011 3:09 pm

Dvergar wrote:

Good thing we didn't have some kind of national healthcare system to take care of this.

If you think that a health care system of any kind will stop idiots from suing idiots then you're a drooling fucking fool.

Dvergar · **Posted:** Mon Aug 01, 2011 3:52 pm

Usdk wrote:

Dvergar wrote:

Good thing we didn't have some kind of national healthcare system to take care of this.

If you think that a health care system of any kind will stop idiots from suing idiots then you're a drooling fucking fool.

Are you retarded? He's suing because he can't pay his medical bills (medical expenses account for a massive number of lawsuits). If his treatment was taken care of, he wouldn't be suing. I never said it would stop idiots from suing idiots, it would stop this case (and many like it). I know you are incapable of understanding an issue beyond a misinformed knee-jerk reaction, but do us all a favor and think a little before you post.

Usdk · **Posted:** Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:08 pm

His medical bills that he voluntarily incurred.

It's frivolous and in a perfect world this case would be dismissed immediately.

Necrachilles · **Posted:** Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:10 pm

Dvergar wrote:

Usdk wrote:

Dvergar wrote:

Good thing we didn't have some kind of national healthcare system to take care of this.

If you think that a health care system of any kind will stop idiots from suing idiots then you're a drooling fucking fool.

Are you retarded? He's suing because he can't pay his medical bills (medical expenses account for a massive number of lawsuits). If his treatment was taken care of, he wouldn't be suing. I never said it would stop idiots from suing idiots, it would stop this case (and many like it). I know you are incapable of understanding an issue beyond a misinformed knee-jerk reaction, but do us all a favor and think a little before you post.

Because people never fake injuries to sue for more money right?

Jubbergun · **Posted:** Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:11 pm

Then you really are an idiot, because they'll still sue for "pain and suffering" and/or "mental anguish." So now you can get off the floor and stop kicking and screaming about how something unrelated and stupid would have stopped this lawsuit, because it wouldn't. You might as well have said banning Miley Cyrus would have stopped the whole thing, because this woman wouldn't have tried to (justifiably) kill herself after hearing her "music," because that's about the level of stupidity your previous statement represents.

Your Pal,
Jubber

Azelma · **Posted:** Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:15 pm

Jubbergun wrote:

they'll still sue for "pain and suffering" and/or "mental anguish."

In the article one of the guys suing was talking about how he'll "never be the same" and how it was all horrifying seeing her being burned etc. So I think there's definitely a "pain and suffering" angle they are trying to exploit. It's all very hilarious...like "how dare you try to kill yourself and make me witness such a thing because I felt compelled to save you"

Next time I'm burning in a car I might say "don't save me" just to save myself future legal bills =/

Yuratuhl · **Posted:** Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:17 pm

There's no law compelling you to help people either, though. I don't want to downplay lifesaving at all, but it turns into one of those "should've known the risks" dealies. It's a contributory thing, so even if they win the final amount will be reduced by whatever percentage is determined to be their fault for being helpful.

What Dvergar posted nonetheless remains entirely valid.

(Also "pain and suffering" and especially "mental anguish" tend not to fly as well as actual injuries)

Aestu · **Posted:** Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:37 pm

I think they're absolutely within their rights to sue and I hope they win.

A good, lawful, livable society requires that citizens act in good faith and help random people in anguish.

These guys had no way of knowing this woman recklessly endangered herself and by doing so in public put others at risk.

What were they supposed to do? Sit there and watch this woman burn to death? Or go on with their business, scarred because they did the right thing? How is that just?

Weena · **Posted:** Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:57 pm

I'm not entirely against it.

People shouldn't be punished for someone else's deliberate actions.

At the same time though, it's kind of a buyer beware situation. Anybody buying a heaping serving of "rescue damsels from burning cars" knows exactly what all comes with that purchase.

So this is where I'm glad I'm not a lawmaker.

Also, good fucking luck getting any money from someone who tried offing themselves.

Jushiro · **Posted:** Mon Aug 01, 2011 6:29 pm

slightly on topic:

is suicide illegal there?

Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

Is the Law Stupid or are People Assholes Or What?

Who is online