Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny
|
Now, I am no legal beagel. But I did stay at a holiday inn express last night.
With that as my background, I found a couple of things pretty scary about that Complaint:
1. They are naming the driver of the Viper, which was not physically involved in the accident, in the complaint.
2. The modifications to the Supra are taking a fairly central role here, in that they are being identified as an item which led to, increased the probability of, or increased the severity of the accident.
3. - and this is dependant upon my ignorance of the case - but the fact that the plantiff's attorney is alleging that Nick was DUI, in addition to the claim that Terry knowingly and willingly gave the minors alcohol, seems more like a criminal allegation then a civil allegation? Was Nick charged with, and subsequently convicted of, DUI? If no, can the plantiff allege these items in a civil setting?
4. I understand how Linda can be liable for preventing Nick from operating a car while allegedly drunk, but how can she also be liable for allowing TERRY to do the same? He is of the "age of majority" and not technically a charge of Linda, correct?
5. Doesnt the fact that the fourth person drove the Viper do anything to substantiate the fact that both Linda and Terry took proactive measures in regards to driving, assuming they were both inebriated?
I have more questions, but these were the biggies.
If only law school didn't take three years and cost $200k...