Lawsuit - immigrants families sue trailer co

slowrev · Aug 4, 2005

Bird, Isn't this a case of conflicting laws? Seatbelt vs Pickup bed hauling. Or is it clarified somewhere ?

I did notice that TX seems to have the same exemption for farm workers.

Ben

jeffinsgf · Aug 4, 2005

( Funny,
All this talk of McD's coffee has NOTHING to do with this discussion of the families of victims who were left to die in an almost airtight box in hundred degree heat in TEXAS!!!!!!!!!!!

This tangent of coffee might as well be the discussion of the seasons on MARS!

Likewise the tangent of the illegal aliens. These were human lives that were lost.

.... Convict the jerks responsible and move on.

SEE? /forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif )

Guilty as charged. /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif However, the jerk has been convicted, according to the linked story. My lawyer convinced me not to pursue a legal matter several years ago because I was going to chase a turnip. You know, "You can't get blood from a turnip"? The driver is a turnip -- out of work and most likely he'll be in prison. It appears that some lawyers less scrupulous than mine have advised the families of the victims. Since the driver is a turnip, they've gone after the leasing company and the manufacturer of the trailer, along with the turnip. That puts some deep pockets in the equation, whether they're really to blame or not. The hope is that the jury will decide that someone has to pay for this tragedy and they'll tag the closest entity with some assets.

I truly hate the idea espoused by the current administration on limitations to our right to sue, but how can we reinstate common sense?

Bird · Aug 4, 2005

( Isn't this a case of conflicting laws? )

There are quite a number of "exceptions" to the law requiring the use of seat belts. Some others are listed below.

( § 545.413. SAFETY BELTS; OFFENSE. (a) A person
commits an offense if the person:
(1) is at least 15 years of age;
(2) is riding in the front seat of a passenger vehicle
while the vehicle is being operated;
(3) is occupying a seat that is equipped with a safety
belt; and
(4) is not secured by a safety belt.
(b) A person commits an offense if the person:
(1) operates a passenger vehicle that is equipped with
safety belts; and
(2) allows a child who is at least five years of age
but younger than 17 years of age or who is younger than five years of
age and at least 36 inches in height to ride in the vehicle without
requiring the child to be secured by a safety belt, provided the
child is occupying a seat that is equipped with a safety belt.
(c) A passenger vehicle or a seat in a passenger vehicle is
considered to be equipped with a safety belt if the vehicle is
required under Section 547.601 to be equipped with safety belts.
(d) An offense under Subsection (a) is a misdemeanor
punishable by a fine of not less than $25 or more than $50. An
offense under Subsection (b) is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine
of not less than $100 or more than $200.
(e) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that:
(1) the person possesses a written statement from a
licensed physician stating that for a medical reason the person
should not wear a safety belt;
(2) the person presents to the court, not later than
the 10th day after the date of the offense, a statement from a
licensed physician stating that for a medical reason the person
should not wear a safety belt;
(3) the person is employed by the United States Postal
Service and performing a duty for that agency that requires the
operator to service postal boxes from a vehicle or that requires
frequent entry into and exit from a vehicle;
(4) the person is engaged in the actual delivery of
newspapers from a vehicle or is performing newspaper delivery
duties that require frequent entry into and exit from a vehicle;
(5) the person is employed by a public or private
utility company and is engaged in the reading of meters or
performing a similar duty for that company requiring the operator
to frequently enter into and exit from a vehicle; or
(6) The person is operating a commercial vehicle
registered as a farm vehicle under the provisions of Section
502.163 that does not have a gross weight, registered weight, or
gross weight rating of 48,000 pounds or more )

BB_TX · Aug 4, 2005

All this talk of McD's coffee has NOTHING to do with this discussion of the families of victims who were left to die in an almost airtight box in hundred degree heat in TEXAS!!!!!!!!!!! 
I fully agree with you and I inadvertently got the discussion off track. And I am sympathetic to the families of those who died trying to improve their life. But the trailer manufacturer should in no way be held liable or even dragged into the ordeal for their illegal activities. And neither should the truck company unless there is some evidence that they may have known what the truck was being used for.

hobbyfarm · Aug 4, 2005

( ...does it bug anyone else that our consumer goods in our stores say nothing in three languages now? It used to be that you could read a product package and have a pretty good idea what it was and how it works. Now that they have to do everything in three languages, there's not enough room for a decent description. And the French??? What is the percentage of French Canadians and why does that country let that tiny group force themselves on the whole country --- and now us, too? )

YES,
One word for the French...Learn to speak English, and now everyone else, Learn to Speak English!
There. Jeff is that better? /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Have you seen how small the words on a prescription bottle get when put there in three languagas? Ridiculous!

hobbyfarm · Aug 4, 2005

Bird,
Thank you for clarifying this! This experience sometimes comes with a cost (ticket)! /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

hobbyfarm · Aug 4, 2005

BB_TX,
I think the driver, providing he knew nothing about his cargo would've been judgement proof. But, he knew. His actions of abandoning the tractor-trailer shows even the blind that he knew what he was hauling.
The truck leasing co. should be judgement proof. How can you be held responsible for something, say, your neighbor does? (I still don't see the logic of suing the gun makers)
How can you hold the trailer maker responsible?

This is like bringing a lawsuit to a ball maker because they don't put brakes on a child's ball (headline: Child killed while chasing a run-away ball into the street...Seeking those responsible)

Give me a break!
/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

slowrev · Aug 4, 2005

Bird,
After reading the legalese gobbledy gook, it would seem that the beds of pickup trucks are not covered under the seatbelt laws you posted. Strange, I suppose of course that pickup truck owners have a large lobbying effort /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Ben

jeffinsgf · Aug 4, 2005

( YES,
One word for the French...Learn to speak English, and now everyone else, Learn to Speak English!
There. Jeff is that better? /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Have you seen how small the words on a prescription bottle get when put there in three languagas? Ridiculous! )

Yes, that's better. /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

The amazing part is that I have never met a French Canadian that did not speak English. Their license plate says "We will always remember", though most can't recall what it is that they remember.

We don't seem to have solved much today, but some steam has been vented, some unfortunate folks have been remembered, and we seem to have a much better grip on what lights a fire under country folk.

Bird · Aug 4, 2005

Ben, I only quoted some small excerpts. If you want to go to the Texas Transportation Code you can see the rest, but you'll probably get tired of reading before you find what you want to know. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif