Jury finds Brunswick partially responsible for accident

Strange is that in my country, this guy would have been incriminated for "not intentional" murder (I do not know the right English word for that, but you get the picture).
This may happen even if you hit, with your car, someone on a bike not respecting a red light! This is something I am scared of a lot. You are operating the most dangerous vehicle and you are responsible…as simple as that… though we have health care just for everybody… and the largest national debt on hearth… :huh:
 
Pietro said:
though we have health care just for everybody… and the largest national debt on hearth… :huh:
Click to expand...

I think we will be taking 1st place away from you..:grin:
 
These types of stories make me sick, no personal responsibility at all. Have a problem, hurt someone, find somebody else to blame. This is totally absurd!
 
If this is allowed to continue, we'll all be affected when pleasure boat manufacturers decide that it is not economically feasible to manufacture/sell their products.

No more pleasure boats??

Oh, wait a minute... that supply and demand thing... Ya - our present boats would only go up in value due to lack of supply!!!

Knew there had to be an "upside"!

Or maybe, Sea Ray will just pass on the cost of increased liability insurance premiums they're nailed with to the sticker price of the new models...
 
Do you guys remember all the crying and knashing of teeth last year because Brunswick's legal staff wouldn't approve Skyhook for release?

This is the reason.............
 
I remember some years back there was talk of putting protectors around props on outdrives and outboards - sort of like one of those oscillating room fans. Whatever happened to that? When I saw it back then I was disgusted. I'm sure this was part of the case made by the injured party's attorney. It's a shame. Someone mentioned another sticker - probably won't be enough to prevent more of these suits.

39397336-967f-4520-a936-7b957ea82018_4.jpg
 
Had the injured party told the boat operator "hay man I am going in the water to get the rope? Don't back over me." Would that have prevented his injuries?
 
This jury award is among the most ridiculous things I have ever heard.
 
Last edited:
Jimmy Buoy said:
If this is allowed to continue, we'll all be affected when pleasure boat manufacturers decide that it is not economically feasible to manufacture/sell their products.

No more pleasure boats??

....


Or maybe, Sea Ray will just pass on the cost of increased liability insurance premiums they're nailed with to the sticker price of the new models...
Click to expand...


Look what happened to General Aviation.
 
Interesting...it took three tries to find twelve water-phobic government employees and welfare recipients out of the jury pool. First two trials didn't have quite enough losers sitting in judgment. Remember though, this isn't just on the jury. The judge had the power to dismiss the case and didn't.
 
Last edited:
Bel_Mar_Pointe said:
:huh:
Click to expand...

Sorry. Skyhook is the system that will hold the boat in position. It's a great trick with Zeus. Waiting for bridges to open, docks to clear, etc.. The issue is the liability of someone swimming around the boat using skyhook instead of an anchor.

I had a large boat fire and the lawsuits took almost 5 years to clear. It seemed like everyone that was within 100 miles of accident and had a net worth of great than $100 was sued. The EPA, The National Park Service, ARAmark, me and on and on. In the end, the attorneys made a bunch and there was no settlement other than the check for full value I got 72 hours after the accident. Nuts.
 
Here's a novel idea. Why don't we as pleasure boat owners file a civil suit against the 12 jurors alleging that intentially and willfully inflicted fianancial harm on us for owning boats. The fianancial harm comes from inflicting higher new boat prices and liablility insurance costs on us. Then there's emotional harm that will come from us having to drive our boats a such low speeds to avoid running over any fish leaving us terrified of being sued by PETA who got the idea from their jury award. And then there is their non-medical condition of being stupid which could harm others in the future through their non-reasoned acts.....
 
Juries will always be looking to sock it to the "big greedy corporation." The outcome of this case is not at all surprising to me. Small consolation - the did assign some percentage of the blame to the driver and swimmer.
 
Boulder GT3,

Sorry but you are not correct. The liability issue isn't just someone swimming around the boat with Skyhook. Skyhook automatically, without human input, shifts one of both drives into and out of gear in either or both directions. If this jury found the manufacturer liable just because props turned, what a field day they would have had with a system that can take off and run over a swimmer on its own.
 
fwebster said:
Boulder GT3,

Sorry but you are not correct. The liability issue isn't just someone swimming around the boat with Skyhook. Skyhook automatically, without human input, shifts one of both drives into and out of gear in either or both directions. If this jury found the manufacturer liable just because props turned, what a field day they would have had with a system that can take off and run over a swimmer on its own.
Click to expand...

I think we're saying the same thing I just used the swimmer as a simple example.

I'm of two minds on the subject. On one hand, why would anyone get in the water when wheels can turn without intervention? A quick trip out of the gene pool. On the other hand, I see people do crazy things all day long. If I was a boat maker I probably wouldn't enable it either.
 
These are the kinda suits that just grind my A$$!!!!!!!!
Why have we become a society that doesn't accept blaim for anything? We put it on someone else and execpt to be compensated for it! The lawyers play a big part in fueling these cases. They will sue for anything anymore. Can a family sue if Dad falls off the boat and drowns because the boat manufacturer should've put a saftey harness or net on board??? Yes it sucks the guy lost a leg. Yes anyone would love to get a 3.8 million dollar settlement. In the end everyone else winds up paying for it though. DAMNIT!
 
This reminds me of the Crownline suit a year or so ago. It is tragic when it happens, and I sympathize with the victim. BUT, people do dumb things and do not take responsibility, it's about money. Sad. This will probably lead to a rash of suits...I suppose someone will hit the throttle, their hot coffee will spill out of the cupholder and onto their leg...sue the boat company!!!!
Ridiculous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
113,266
Messages
1,429,691
Members
61,143
Latest member
seanmoconnor10
Back
Top