The sad thing is all the money in the world isn't going to help John G. I guess it will make his families life better when they can go buy a new car while he sits in the hospital
There is a prime example why you shouldn't street race. Obviously, you can crash, but the guy in the Viper was just racing along side them, did not hit anyone, did not crash, and he is also being sued.
Can you believe he was caught speeding over 100MPH in a 70 more a couple times in one day, with his dad in the car? Hulk took one too many pile drivers from Mr Wonderful.
It's a doozie. The attorneys did there homework before they filed this one. Discovery is gonna be an assripper for the Hogans.
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...
The sad thing is all the money in the world isn't going to help John G. I guess it will make his families life better when they can go buy a new car while he sits in the hospital
True, but there are thousands of other victims and families that get screwed all the time by our justice system, so at least the Graz family will get something for their heartache.
1. They are naming the driver of the Viper, which was not physically involved in the accident, in the complaint.
Yes, that is scary. If I would have been minding my own business on Court Street and that idiot Nick Bollea ran into the tree while trying to goad me into a race I'd be in just as big of shit as his buddy that actually was racing him.
True, but there are thousands of other victims and families that get screwed all the time by our justice system, so at least the Graz family will get something for their heartache.
Really? How is 30% of the awarded verdict going to do anything to heal heartache? That is if they even get to see a cent of the money.
Assuming the jury finds against the Hogans, and the family is awarded a "sustainable" sum - i.e. no $100mmmm award - they are going to lose expenses (which will be substantial in a case like this with all the "expert witness" testimony), probably 25-35% to the lawyers, and then another 30% in taxes since the award would be punative (well, the amount over the compensatory damaged would be taxed, and that will be the bulk of the money).
Assuming they get a $1,000,000. They will probably only gross out $350,000 of it, less 35% - they are looking at, what, $200k? I dont know about you, but if it was my loved one performing all his bodily functions through a straw, I dont think I would be willing to rehash it all in front of national media for a piddling 200 grand.
Yes, that is scary. If I would have been minding my own business on Court Street and that idiot Nick Bollea ran into the tree while trying to goad me into a race I'd be in just as big of shit as his buddy that actually was racing him.
And by the logic of the plantiff's attorney, you might as well have bathed in the blood of a 1,000 virgin martyrs. Especially if you were driving ol' number 34.
If engine modifications prove intent, then I can't imagine what they could spin "racing livery" to be.
Interesting. I'm sure there was a big fight over who would bring the suit on his behalf since the only beneficiaries are the split parents. That always makes for a curious sideshow.
However, the bottom line is this had to be brought on his behalf. His life care plan will be in the millions. Some people will say it's on him for not wearing a seatbelt.
Maybe, but who knows whether a seatbelt would have saved him from being a kumquat? That car was mashed.
I for one would be surprised if the verdict is less than 5M, but will probably be at least 10M. Hulk is still earning money hosting American Gladiators, and he can always go back to wrestling (if that is what you would call it). He is still a huge star with good earning potential, so I can definitely see them tapping his future earnings.
Interesting. I'm sure there was a big fight over who would bring the suit on his behalf since the only beneficiaries are the split parents. That always makes for a curious sideshow.
However, the bottom line is this had to be brought on his behalf. His life care plan will be in the millions. Some people will say it's on him for not wearing a seatbelt.
Maybe, but who knows whether a seatbelt would have saved him from being a kumquat? That car was mashed.
I would be a metric shit ton of cash on the defense parading every single person who though the injured kid looked at them wrong onto the stand. I bet they try to prove that this kid was a bad egg, and accordingly tarnish his rep for two reasons:
1. if they jury doesn't like him, they will be less inclined to side with him and
2. If they can prove he was a bad egg, and had a habit of encouraging Nick to act in a reckless manner, in addition to act recklessly of his own volition, then the whole notion of the "breach of duty of care" is effectively undermined. How can there be an implied duty of care when the injured person did not owe themself as much?
