Post Hole Digger lawsuit ends poorly for farmer

[stuckmotor]

A shudder goes through me every time I see this thread.

 

[Mike_Kanzer]

This reminds me of what General McAuliffe replied to the Germans at Bastogne when asked to surrender - "Nuts!"

 

[crazyal]

So what type of farm was this? I don't know of any farm around me that could survive such a judgement. Even if they had enough insurance to cover this their rate increase would wipe them out. If this is a large corp farm then it could be different. As far as not training or supervising a farm hand, that's also a hard one. How many small farmers have the time to supervise every worker? Again most I know around me offer food, a bed, and pay for labor. Maybe for the first couple of days they are watched but if they prove themselves all bets are off.

 

[Redneck in training]

Even if he would win the cost of defending himself could be substantial enough to bankrupt the farm.

 

[Industrial Toys]

I heard a newscast yesterday that brought my blood to a boil. It concerned a lawsuit here in Canada. Apparently if several people are sued and one doesn't have any money, the TOTAL damages must be paid by the other party(s)! This to me, says that it is NOT about neglegence at all. It is all about where those scum sucking, bottom feeding Lawyers can find their money!

 

[woodlandfarms]

The article doesn't say what kind of farm. Having a 5mil GL policy is pretty common these days. We run 2 mil with no production or farm work.

What will happen is that as was with McDonalds it was appealed. Price will be dropped to something manageable by insurance companies, and the attorneys will take all of it except for the money for medical.

What galls me is class action suits. Not that they happen as generally when they do it is for a good reason, but that the only people who make money are the attorneys.

 

[bdog]

I hate these crazy lawsuits but I am surprised a lot more people are not hurt with three point post hole diggers. Everyone I have ever seen digs slowly because of no downforce so people are always trying to push down on them which puts you right in harms way. A phd that mounts on a loader works ten times better and is safer as there is no temptation or reason for someone to get close to it.

 

[rmk700]

Had Lymon been on his own farm and did his unsafe act their would not have been a lawsuit simply because their is no one to sue.. Now that there is a third party, he all of a sudden becomes no longer accountable for his stupidly? The system is flawed. Employers should present safety training but by no means be fully responsible. It is solely your responsibility to keep yourself alive.

 

[TomSeller]

. A phd that mounts on a loader works ten times better and is safer as there is no temptation or reason for someone to get close to it.

I totally agree with this. I have a hydraulic PHD Quick Attach to my FEL, but the other option is to attach it to a backhoe, if you have one. Both provide more than adequate downforce.

 

[sparc]

You can't make everything dummy proof. Where was the person on the tractor that could have stopped the PHD?? I survived the years that had little to no safety devices. Sometimes we just have to use the old brain. When I cut myself with a knife I didn't sue the knife maker , when I've mashed my finger with a hammer I didn't sue the hammer maker. Some day we won't be able to buy anything because all these manufactures will go out of business for fear of being sued . We'll have to perform work like they did in the stone ages

You can and you can't. You (manufacturer) should make it safe from any forseen hazards, and the other half is providing training or instruction (manuals, hands-on, etc.) on how to safely use the equipment and what its limits are.

I think it would be tough to sue a hammer manufacturer which has zero moving parts, unless the item breaks because of inferior workmanship or material failure. Just about anything that occurs is caused by the person swinging the hammer. That hammer laying on the bench can't smash your thumb, it requires someone who looses concentration or for other reason swings the hammer in a direction that causes it to land on their thumb, the hammer has no internal guidance system, it's all on the person holding the hammer.

Meanwhile a PHD has a number of moving parts, is designed and/or engineered to perform a task (sometimes not designed so well) with clearances between some moving parts that create hazards or the potential for injury that need to be guarded against to make it realatively safe to operate. Yes you can't engineer away all risk (within financial reason) for a piece of equipment like this, but if you the manufacturer recognize (or should have) that something can happen and do not mitigate or remove the hazard how is that OK? I grew up in those years of no safety devices, no OSHA, no FDA, EPA, NTSB, etc. As you say I too am also thankful for the lessons that I learned growing up in that enviroment but sorry but I don't want to go back. Looking back I can see that I took a number of risks that had I known better (had training or read the manual) or the product was made safer I would not have been at risk. The manufacturer might not have made as much profit, and profit is what drives too many decisions on how to manufacturer or build something.

Follow the money and most times you'll find the truth.

What galls me is class action suits. Not that they happen as generally when they do it is for a good reason, but that the only people who make money are the attorneys.

Unfortunately thats how it ends up, and you'll never get it changed because the people who make the laws or rules are all a sub-set of the group who makes the living collecting those fees. Lawyers governing lawyers, yeah they'll come down hard on them won't they. It's like asking a medical review board to take a doctors license away, or a cop giving an off-duty cop a speeding ticket, doesn't happen too often.

But I thin that if they have caps on malpractice suits then there should be a percentage cap put on the atorneys fee limiting it to 10% or 15% of the award. Or their fee should be some percentage of the award but it is on top of the award not a cut of the award, so a $100k judgement would all go to the winner, and the lawyer would get $10K. Total penalty would be $110K.