Fish-Hawk.Net

What is wrong with the judicial system?? Unreal

Scott

Boating Industry
Tuesday April 6, 2010

AUSTIN, Texas —

A federal jury Monday found Brunswick Corp. partially liable for a 2005 incident in which a teen's leg was severed by a propeller, according to a report in the Austin American-Statesman. Jurors ordered the company to pay $3.8 million in medical expenses and damages.

After deliberating for about seven hours, jurors found that Brunswick shared more than half of the blame for the accident. Jurors also found the teen responsible as well as the driver of the boat, the report said.

Brunswick officials said in a statement Monday that while they remain sympathetic to the plaintiff, they are "nevertheless disappointed with today's verdict." The company said it will evaluate its options going forward, including a possible appeal.

"Brunswick Corporation and Mercury Marine stand behind our products, which are used safely and properly by boaters around the world," the company stated.

Jacob Brochtrup, who was 18 at the time of the accident, sued Sea Ray Boats Inc. and Mercury Marine for liability in 2007. The accident occurred when he had been celebrating the July Fourth weekend wakeboarding with three friends.

"Brochtrup had just finished his turn on the wakeboard when a tow rope popped off the back of the white Sea Ray ski boat," the paper reports. "Brochtrup jumped out of the boat to grab the line. Unaware that Brochtrup was in the water behind him, 18-year-old driver Patrick Houston put his family's boat in reverse."

According to the suit, the manufacturer of the boat and motor did not have safety devices, including guards or covers. Brochtrup's attorney said this marks the first successful case against the boating industry by a person injured by a motor. Boat makers recently prevailed in two similar suits nationally that involved older-model boats. And jurors in two previous trials of Brochtrup's case deadlocked, resulting in mistrials.

For the complete details from the American-Statesman,
http://www.statesman.com/news/local/jur ... 27456.html

__________________

Sad and sad. These people would sue the sun if they could.

The only safety mechanism I can think of that would prevent someone from getting cut up, while the boat is in reverse, would be a trolling plate.

And IF there was a safety device on the boat, I'm sure it would affect performance, reducing the pleasure had by wakeboarding.

My $0.02
BeaArthur

ishhhhh !

best safety device I can think of is....a brain

Paddler wrote:best safety device I can think of is....a brain

way too many boats lack one of those at the helm

I see he sued Sea Ray & Merc, did he also sue his
A-hole buddy for backing over him!!????

Litigation crazy or what!!!?? :hs :hs

I'm half nervous posting in this thread now for fear of getting sued by these same folks.... heck, if the motor mfg is liable, I might be too.

The boat driver got off with nothing. I think I'm gonna sue my silverware manufacturer when I get fat.

Graembo wrote:The boat driver got off with nothing. I think I'm gonna sue my silverware manufacturer when I get fat.

Let's do that together....Anyone in for a class action lawsuit...

Graembo wrote:The boat driver got off with nothing. I think I'm gonna sue my silverware manufacturer when I get fat.

If I were in your shoes I'd sue Molson and MacDonalds........... Your already fat.

I may sue my mother for not breast-feeding me!!!

So the guy that was driving the boat and caused the accident is not sued but the company that has been making motors and such get sued and loose out. I would say that their lawyer really is the one that should be fired there.

Basic defense:
Who was driving the boat?
Was Mercury the one that put the boat in reverse?
Did the driver look behind him when he put it in reverse?

From there, you see no fault. Like suing a car manufacturer because I ran over someone.

D

The real tragedy in this whole thing:

1) Successful Plaintiff gets costs from unsuccessful Defendants;
2) Unsuccessful Defendants look to insurer to cover liability;
3) Insurance rates go up for everyone as insurance payouts are a collective;
4) Unsuccessful Defendants third-party the goof driver
6) Goof driver (no doubt on a public defendant ticket) looks to his insurer to cover liability (Hey public pays twice here because…)
4) ALL of the above costs are passed on to consumers of boats, motors and insurance in higher purchase costs and coverage amounts.

I hope buddy chokes on his $.

Annother example of why alot of people have very little faith in the judicial system.......can't blame them.....that is really f,,,ed up!