Only in America

[dave1949]

One more thing to think about.... the little girl is going to have huge medical bills for a long time. Maybe the dad doesn't have insurance and is just grasping at any chance to pay for care for her. Doesn't excuse his actions, just something to think about.

MossRoad,

Thank you for posting the link to the article. The child was 2, not 4. The father probably intended for her to be in the house, not outside. Those facts are in his favor.

On the minus side, he put a 9yr old in charge of 4 younger children. A third grader? Maybe some, but not most 9 yr olds can do that.

What ever was said about the lawn mower, instructions, switches, etc. is all smoke and mirrors for the jury. If you own a power tool, it's your responsibility to know how to use it. It's even possible, the more safety features added to a lawnmower, the less safety vigilant the user may be.

He may have been motivated by medical bills to sue, but following that idea would just rekindle the health care debate and lead straight to politics.

Dave.

 

[horse7]

I have yet to interest anyone in my swarm of autonomous mowbots that use little fingers to shorten overlong grass and remove weeds (and optionally pick up rocks). They come complete with energy leeching capability.

Whirling deadly blades are so 19th century (1827 according to Jimbo's Wikipedia)!

Innovation is withering in America.

 

[dave1949]

To MossRoad's very good point about about medical costs and to attempt to show some of you I'm not as heartless as you make out, please read this quote from my previous post #23:

It stops when we are willing to have sympathy for the child and empathy for the father, but at the same time be willing to make it clear he is responsible for his actions which caused the accident and we don't want to pay for it beyond providing medical care to his child.

Horse7
Spending time and money cutting swaths of a poisoned monoculture is so 20th century. Free the lawn

Dave.

 

[Scooby074]

Moss:
Theres so many infuriating things in that newspaper report to comment on...

Leaving a 9 year old to look after FOUR younger kids.... thats some fine judgment there.

The lawyers use of polarizing terms like"override" and "child safety device" to sway the jury.. To quote Helen Lovejoy..."Wont somebody think of the Children!!!!!"
Like somehow if deere hadnt included this "override" of a "child safety device" then this little girl would be fine.... Its totally not the fathers fault for putting a child in charge of four younger siblings, or his fault for not looking behind himself before backing up... no not at all.. its big bad deeres fault for having the NERVE to include this override

Nevermind the fact that even if the mower deck was disengaged, the blades would be still turning, or the fact that even if the blades were stopped, that child would still have had a several hundred pound mower on top of her

Then going at the "Well nobody told me a mower was dangerous angle" No ****.. you didnt know a mower was dangerous because the dealer didnt take you by the hand and read the manual to you? Are you that dumb that you think that a machine designed to cut grass is harmless? What happened to common sense?

Grrrr... lawsuits like this tick me off..... I have kids of my own, and ive taught them to respect machines and to stay clear. I also leave them with their mother or grandparents when dangerous things like mowing take place. Id never leave a 9year old as a babysitter, and certainly not to take care of 4 other kids. Its MY job as a father to ensure my kids are safe.. NOT deeres, or honda or kubota or sears...

Remember the famous MacDonalds hot coffee lawsuit.. what was the jury smoking that day? You can thank them for those stupid "Contents Hot" warnings on everything. Really.. Coffee is hot? Who'd have thunk it?

 

[woodlandfarms]

Moss:

Remember the famous MacDonalds hot coffee lawsuit.. what was the jury smoking that day? You can thank them for those stupid "Contents Hot" warnings on everything. Really.. Coffee is hot? Who'd have thunk it?

I do completely agree that this lawsuit went the wrong way, But... But... The attorney for McD's was a complete butt. Treated the Jury, and the defendant, with disdain. As a jury is human and emotions play into decisions, the general thought is that if the defending attorney had been more likeable, it would have been a different outcome. I think this case was overturned in a higher court (will have to google to find out)

 

[Gator6x4]

No the case was not overturned, she got her money from MacDonalds. Small chilren have very-very-very long memories. Maybe she had been provided rides on the mower in the past and wanted to ride again.

 

[jimmyj]

Tough story, poor kid. Why do so often people have to blame someone for stuff that happens? (Rhetorical question of course). All the lawyers and blame in the world won't undo what happened.

 

[dgl24087]

A couple of years ago in Botetourt Co., VA, a couple successfully sued Lowe's and MTD for $5 million for the same thing, babysitter's husband was mowing and backed up, running over and killing a 2 year old. The babysitter and her husband were not named in the suit.

 

[tdan300]

There are so many rumors running around about the McDonald's coffee lawsuit. As you can tell from my response earlier, I AM NOT IN FAVOR of frivolous lawsuits. However, the McDonald's one I agree with. There are a lot of facts behind the lawsuit that are not normally published. Use the below link to read some of the real background, or Google and read.

The Actual Facts about the Mcdonalds' Coffee Case

I know that as a child in the 1950's, lawsuits were unknown. If you were hurt as someone's place, you usally got in trouble at home for doing something stupid, your parents did not immediately sue. I have a neighbor that sues regularly - gets her house remodeled fromt he proceeds - and brags about it. Then she wonders why I would not allow her children to come on my property and play with my grandchildren when they were young. I have heard her daughter at the approx age of 8 make comments to other people like "You better not do that or my mom will sue" I am sure she has grown up to be the same.

Sad statement for the United States.

 

[dave1949]

Tough story, poor kid. Why do so often people have to blame someone for stuff that happens? (Rhetorical question of course). All the lawyers and blame in the world won't undo what happened.

If this accident had happened, the child was cared for, no law suit, etc., we would all think only about the poor little girl, that would be the end of it.

When the accident ends up as an issue in a lawsuit, it 'goes public' so to speak. We have a legitimate public interest in who is to blame since we all will pay financially in some way. Through higher product costs, insurance, etc.

Healing the child certainly costs something, but that is not the 'public' cost that I am addressing. The compensatory and punitive damage awards are paid for by all consumers when granted by a judge or jury in lawsuits. Sometimes justly, but since we are paying for it, we all have a legitimate interest.