View Poll Results: What is your verdict and how much?

Voters
19. You may not vote on this poll
  • For the Truck Company

    11 57.89%
  • For GC

    0 0%
  • $0.00

    5 26.32%
  • $1.00

    1 5.26%
  • $70,000

    0 0%
  • $100,000

    0 0%
  • $250,000

    2 10.53%
Page 2 of 48 FirstFirst 12345678912 ... LastLast
Results 14 to 26 of 621
  1. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    10,001
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by coolwhip View Post
    Did you tell this to the jury when you walked in? LMAO
    I did not set up the jury system. I would have rather let the Judge decide. He can think beyond "should have seen it, should have seen it, should have seen it."

  2. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    4,018
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian GC View Post
    Typically yes. But when a professional road crew sets up a work area, they are to follow clearly outlined regulations in the MUTCD Chapter 6. It tells them how to set out their cones, how far back to set them depending on the speed of the traffic, what type of signage to use, what combination of signage to use, etc. When they block a bike lane certain signage is also required. When they work on a State Hwy, which they were, more signage is required.

    When one of us uses the highway, yes, we can stop as traffic dictates and the cars behind are required to stop. But when lanes are professionally closed and blocked, they are to follow the MUTCD and the WATCH Manual. They totally disregarded it.
    Just because they were in violation doesn’t mean they are responsible for your damages. With the little I know I would probably say that that company should have been fined by the responsible government agency for violating regulations but that you are responsible for your own damages.

  3. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    10,001
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by davidadavis View Post
    Just because they were in violation doesn’t mean they are responsible for your damages. With the little I know I would probably say that that company should have been fined by the responsible government agency for violating regulations but that you are responsible for your own damages.
    Can I dig a hole in public, not put any yellow tape around to warn the public, and when someone falls into it and injures themselves, I walk away scott free saying "should have seen it?"

    If not, what's the difference?

  4. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    4,018
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian GC View Post
    Can I dig a hole in public, not put any yellow tape around to warn the public, and when someone fall into it and injures themselves, I walk away scott free saying "should have seen it?"

    If not, what's the difference?
    The difference is reasonable expectations. If a road has a vehicle on it, is it really a surprise? But a hole in the road is different.

  5. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    10,001
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by davidadavis View Post
    The difference is reasonable expectations. If a road has a vehicle on it, is it really a surprise? But a hole in the road is different.
    Can we be prepared for all illegal actions on the road? The surprise was the size and position of the truck. I could not process my options fast enough, and I am pretty darn good at it. If the truck was forcing me into 70mph traffic, or to come to a complete stop, do they have a responsibility to warn me to prepare to stop. If we are to be prepared for sudden lane closures, why use cones or signs at all...as a courtesy? Why even have Chapter 6 of the MUTCD?

    Would they stop their truck in 40mph traffic and only rely on an arrow board? Heck no they wouldn't. Then why do you think they can do it to me? The highest average speed of cyclists along that stretch of road is 38mph...in large groups.

  6. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    St. Louis
    Posts
    7,369
    Post Likes
    Were riding a bike on a public roadway?
    Is the Religious Right to blame for Christianity's decline?

    They argued that, as the Religious Right became increasingly visible and militant, it became associated with Christianity itself. And if being a Christian meant being associated with the likes of Jerry Falwell, many people—especially political moderates and liberals—decided to simply stop identifying as Christians altogether.

    http://www.theamericanconservative.c...nitys-decline/

  7. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    10,001
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by hurtinhvac View Post
    Were riding a bike on a public roadway?
    Yes, it was a State Hwy with a marked bike lane. With 70mph traffic 4' to my left.

  8. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    26,981
    Post Likes
    This question has no value as it's stated. It asks for the application of common sense logic to a Law logic question. Laws were once based on common sense and written and enacted by common minded and logical men - but now they are not. Rather; they are now devised by the group of people who will most likely be benefited by them: lawyers and lawyers elected or appointed to public office.

    PHM
    -------

    Quote Originally Posted by glennac View Post
    Let us be the jury here. You decide the fate of GC in his suit against a trucking company for damages suffered by him running into the back of a parked truck on a highway.
    PHM
    --------
    The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking.

  9. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    10,001
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by Poodle Head Mikey View Post
    This question has no value as it's stated. It asks for the application of common sense logic to a Law logic question. Laws were once based on common sense and written and enacted by common minded and logical men - but now they are not. Rather; they are now devised by the group of people who will most likely be benefited by them: lawyers and lawyers elected or appointed to public office.

    PHM
    -------
    In my case a mega-corp benefited by foreseeing the stupidity and shallowness of a jury.

  10. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    St. Louis
    Posts
    7,369
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian GC View Post
    Yes, it was a State Hwy with a marked bike lane. With 70mph traffic 4' to my left.
    Yep...saw the other thread. I am biased as hell against non motored craft on public roadways.

    I have points against me...I should hop off right about here.
    Is the Religious Right to blame for Christianity's decline?

    They argued that, as the Religious Right became increasingly visible and militant, it became associated with Christianity itself. And if being a Christian meant being associated with the likes of Jerry Falwell, many people—especially political moderates and liberals—decided to simply stop identifying as Christians altogether.

    http://www.theamericanconservative.c...nitys-decline/

  11. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    26,981
    Post Likes
    The negligent actions of the agents of the truck deploying company created a foreseeable hazard. They were aware, or should have been made aware, of the both the potential circumstances and the laws pertaining to their work environment's safety. The suit should have named the workers all personally, the company they worked for, and the jurisdiction in which it occurred. I would have also named the manufacturer of the bicycle, the manufacturer of any safety equipment worn by the bicycle's operator, and the manufacturer of the truck.

    The most basic standard the law requires the defendants to maintain is: The Way Of A Reasonable Man. And in this case "reasonable" means: "reasoned"; the application of sound reasoning. The question to be answered is: Did the workers, and through them; their employer, act as a reasonable man would have been typically acted in the same circumstance? Sans a 'yes' answer - their actions were legally negligent.

    Further; above that basic standard are the application of the specific laws governing their actions. Ignorance of the laws cannot stand as a qualifier. The obligation to know the applicable law is completely with the offender of any applicable laws. With the subsequent question being: did the defendant's failure to follow all applicable laws increase risk? If so: they are legally negligent.

    It is my opinion that anyone losing this case had an incompetent, or unconcerned, or distracted, attorney.

    PHM
    ---------


    Quote Originally Posted by davidadavis View Post
    Just because they were in violation doesn’t mean they are responsible for your damages. With the little I know I would probably say that that company should have been fined by the responsible government agency for violating regulations but that you are responsible for your own damages.
    PHM
    --------
    The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking.

  12. Likes Fender60 liked this post
  13. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    10,001
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by hurtinhvac View Post
    Yep...saw the other thread. I am biased as hell against non motored craft on public roadways.

    I have points against me...I should hop off right about here.
    I was not mixing with traffic. I had my own marked lane. Don't you do what the white lines tell you to do? Stay out of my lane and don't tell me to use yours.

  14. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    26,981
    Post Likes
    You cannot reasonably blame someone for doing their job within the confines of the law. The insurance company's attorney did his job. 'Despicable' is not legally prohibited.

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian GC View Post
    In my case a mega-corp benefited by foreseeing the stupidity and shallowness of a jury.
    PHM
    --------
    The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking.

  15. Likes Fender60 liked this post
Page 2 of 48 FirstFirst 12345678912 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •