Court Rules Bow Riders are Unsafe WHAT THE ?!?!?!?!?!??

Big Island Lifer

Big Island Lifer

Active Member
Feb 1, 2010
1,406
Minnesota
Boat Info
'96 330 Formula SS
For Sale '85 255 Amberjack
Engines
Single 5.7
Saw this on another forum and thought it might provide some good fodder for CSR.
I can't believe that the boat manufacturer was found at fault when the boat driver was a complete moron! :smt021


http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/...tal-palm-valley-boat-crash-terms-confidential


Lawsuits settle in fatal Palm Valley boat crash; terms confidential


Lawsuit targeted manufacturer.


Posted: May 2, 2011 - 3:51pm


  • Photos
The Times-Union
Five people were killed and nine injured when this 22-foot Crownline hit a tugboat in the Intracoastal two years ago.






b
http://data.ad.yieldmanager.net/cli...fidential,http://skirt.com/creativeconference Advertisement


By Paul Pinkham
Lawyers for five victims of a fatal Easter boat crash in Palm Valley two years ago have settled their lawsuit against the boat manufacturer.
Terms of the settlement, reached Thursday in mediation, are confidential, and lawyers for the plaintiffs and Crownline Boats declined comment.
Three injured people and two representatives of deceased victims sued the boatmaker in federal court shortly after the 2009 crash, claiming the design of the Crownline 225BR was inherently unsafe.
The 22-foot pleasure boat struck a tugboat moored in the Intracoastal Waterway just north of the Palm Valley bridge, killing five people and injuring nine.
The lawyers all met with a mediator Thursday, and he notified the court that the case has been settled. The lawyers have 10 days to file a settlement agreement in court.
Maritime attorney Rod Sullivan declined comment Monday but said when he filed one of the lawsuits that Crownline promoted the boat as capable of safely transporting 12 people. That means five have to sit in the bow, forward of the boat's windscreen. State and federal maritime officials view that as unsafe, he said, because it subjects those passengers to ejection and blocks the driver's view.
Several victims were thrown from the boat into the side of the tug.
Though there were 14 people on the boat, Sullivan said that didn't contribute to the accident. He said witnesses told him the boat driver's view was obstructed by passengers on the bow.
The driver was inexperienced but chosen because she was sober, Sullivan said at the time.
Killed were Jacqueline Allen, 44, of Jacksonville; Olivia Carretero, 23, South Lake Tahoe, Calif.; Robert "Trenton" Craig, 23, of Jacksonville Beach; Elisabeth Rosenfeld




Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/...y-boat-crash-terms-confidential#ixzz1LPgwy5S7
 
Freaking retarded people! It's a shame that people were hurt and others killed but it is "their" fault not a boat manufacturer. I am sure they did not have the correct number of pfd's as there isn't enough room to store them. The owner of the boat should be liable for allowing this to happen. If frivolous suits such as this are successful the price of new boats will just need to increase to cover the additional insurance and legal fees. That boat should have no more than 6 people on board, there has to be a weight limit on it right?
 
Our local marina police will ticket you if there is a passenger sitting in front of the driver's view, bowrider or not. Our 18' fish & ski has a decal stating # of passengers and/or a weight limit. Trouble is - some pay attention to the law and some don't. I've seen alot of them on GSV lake. 14 people on a 22' boat is just plain stupid in my opinion.
 
Sounds like the Piper J3 Cub suit that almost killed small general aviation years ago.
Crazy stuff.
 
Responsibility rest overwhelimingly with operator at helm. She didn't take seriously enough the responsibility she had accepted by taking the wheel.

Boats in general are not designed with seat belts and crush absorbing zones and or padding. Usually we don't run into inmmovable objects while underway so not worth the engineering/product cost.
 
The court nor a jury found the manufacturer liable. It was a settlement. Who knows for how much. But even the possibility of a plaintiffs verdict in a mutliple death case wouldn't make it shocking that the manufacturer agreed to settle and buy out that risk.
 
That is plain crazy!! It's a shame that people died here but it is not the boat design that caused it.
First, the operator is at fault for getting too drunk to drive. This left an inexperienced person to man the helm. Bad Idea!!
Second, they overloaded the boat. It says that there should have been 12 people but, they had 14. Some clown said that wasn't a contributing factor! Really?? It had to affect the boats performance and it may have been a contributing factor to the drivers obscured vision. Maybe the bow was overloaded.

I wonder if all of the fatalities were from the bow or if any were catapulted from the rear. I know I was not present in the courtroom, nor am I an attorney but it seems that there are alot of avenues for the manufacturer to defend on.
 
I had this big explanation of how corporations hedge their losses over suits like this but you know what, someone needs to put a stop to this. If a company doesn't have the balls to fight on principle then maybe they need to take the hit.
The bigger picture is how did this ever make it to court. Bleeding heart gutless judges allow these to come to court wanting to hurt corporation. This should have been thrown out at the first sign of infraction by the plaintiff. 14 in a 12 capacity boat would have done it for me not to mention the drunken skipper letting is tart drive.
 
I'm interested in what "officials" find bowriders or five people in the bow unsafe. " State and federal maritime officials view that as unsafe, he said, because it subjects those passengers to ejection and blocks the driver's view." And, I agree there is no precedent value in a settlement. However, time will tell if this recovery theory sets a pattern.

Dennis
 
OldSkool said:
I had this big explanation of how corporations hedge their losses over suits like this but you know what, someone needs to put a stop to this. If a company doesn't have the balls to fight on principle then maybe they need to take the hit.
The bigger picture is how did this ever make it to court. Bleeding heart gutless judges allow these to come to court wanting to hurt corporation. This should have been thrown out at the first sign of infraction by the plaintiff. 14 in a 12 capacity boat would have done it for me not to mention the drunken skipper letting is tart drive.
Click to expand...

This is the crux of the problem. One hedged payout doesn't make much difference, but many encourage lawsuits just for the settlement. Companies are short sighted settling to avoid the risk of the jury, as they likely pay out more in the long run. They must add risk to the plaintiffs attorneys who take these cases.
 
I wonder how large those people were in the bow that the driver couldn't see a boat in front of her?

I feel sorry for everyone involved including the company. Going to trial is where the lawyers really step up the fees
as well as the press getting involved in the case. I'm not surprised they settled out of court.
I don't care how safe a boat is. You can't cure stupid.
 
sfergson727 said:
Yet another fine example that we live in a Jerry Springer world, and at a minimum 70% of the population of the U.S. are morons. (present company excluded of course, for the most part)
Click to expand...

Bravo! :smt038

This is the hidden tax we all pay. The trial attorneys fund Democrats with campaign funds. The Dems stop ALL meaningful tort reform, and appoint make it up as we go judges. The law firms make billions, and give millions of it right back to the politicians that keep the racket going. It's such a merry-go-round I'm dizzy talking about it.

Half of the country doesn't work for a living and when serving as "neutral" jurors thinks: if I was suing a big company I'd want to "win" my lawsuit lottery. Anybody have an idea how much per vessel SR spends on insurance? We had a thread a few months ago about a $3 million ??? Payout or settlement. How often does that happen? If SR had a $3 million payout every 1000 hulls, that would be $3000 per boat.

Part of the issue is the me first world we live in. Would we do the right thing, if it was our fault, if an attorney told us he could get a $3 million settlement out of SR?
 
Last edited:
sfergson727 said:
Yet another fine example that we live in a Jerry Springer world, and at a minimum 70% of the population of the U.S. are morons. (present company excluded of course, for the most part)
Click to expand...

MonacoMike said:
Bravo! :smt038

This is the hidden tax we all pay. The trial attorneys fund Democrats with campaign funds. The Dems stop ALL meaningful tort reform, and appoint make it up as we go judges. The law firms make billions, and give millions of it right back to the politicians that keep the racket going. It's such a merry-go-round I'm dizzy talking about it.

Half of the country doesn't work for a living and when serving as "neutral" jurors thinks: if I was suing a big company I'd want to "win" my lawsuit lottery. Anybody have an idea how much per vessel SR spends on insurance? We had a thread a few months ago about a $3 million ??? Payout or settlement. How often does that happen? If SR had a $3 million payout every 1000 hulls, that would be $3000 per boat.

Part of the issue is the me first world we live in. Would we do the right thing, if it was our fault, if an attorney told us he could get a $3 million settlement out of SR?
Click to expand...
Are you guys related?
 
wow, 14 people in that boat... The Boat Manufacturer probably just didn't want the expense and exposure from a trial and settled...

As for the boaters...Poor judgement before they ever started their fated trip.. How sad, but overloading the boat, no one with lifejackets and a captain that didn't know what he was doing because too many others were drinking.. sounds like a recipe for disaster. One of the reasons I don't even go out on my boat when it's a holiday unless it's early in the am, is too many unsafe boaters with too many drinks in them...
 
AKBASSKING said:
Sometimes it is cheaper and better for the company to settle out of court. Maybe a good strategic move on the part of the company. In 2 months this will be forgotten.
Click to expand...

It will never be forgotten by the trial attorneys. They smell weakness in companies. This is like giving your lunch money to the bully they always come back for more and we pay for it in the price of boats. It’s part of the what is best for today and never looking ahead.
 
One reason to require boat operator licenses I suppose. Would the boat manufacturer have been liable with an unlicensed captain at the helm? Probably so because he/she still could not see over the five behemoths in the front....silly me. Pathetic!
 
IIRC Crownline went bankrupt and the assets were purchased out of bankruptcy sometime in 09. The new company had none of this liability. The old company's insurance company was on the hook would be my guess. No real incentive for them to do anything but settle. Still sucks though, as it further erodes the notion of personal responsibility...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
113,256
Messages
1,429,437
Members
61,135
Latest member
Gregger
Back
Top