Multi million dollar lawsuit potentially? Crump or any other high profile lawyer would represent and fight for the family in sue happy USA. If negligence is found and proven, get ready for a huge payout.
Last edited:
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Death at Icon Park accident
- Thread starter mergatroid
- Start date
Literally any lawyer would take this case in literally any country. The US being "sue happy" has nothing to do with it.
Pain and suffering is where the big money payout is in the USA. Try having a lawyer do that in a Danish court as one example. Bottom line USA is where people will sue for pretty much many things. Another example is if one is injured in the USA , medical bills will mount and the injured sue to get payback. In Canada pretty much universal health care will take care of the injured bills. In a number of European countries they have a loser pay rule. If you sue and lose you have to pay the other party legal costs. Makes one think twice about suing in those countries.
Last edited:
Everything you've just said is completely irrelevant to this case. There is a 0% chance of this boy's family losing the incoming lawsuit that is 100% justified. Why anyone would question this is beyond me. I have no idea who he even is, but it makes no difference what anyone thinks of the lawyer they chose. This is a dream case for any lawyer. His parents probably had their voicemail boxes literally filled with solicitations. The fact that they chose this guy doesn't make their case any less rock solid. They could be represented by a chimpanzee and they would still win. Yes, even in Denmark.
Last edited:
Yeah, I’m not sure what she’s (he?) on about either. This is pretty straightforward case. That kid should not have died, and the family should most definitely be compensated for this tragedy that easily could have been avoided.
I only questioned choosing THAT lawyer because of the cases that I know* he’s taken on, all have been specifically race-related, and this is one case that shouldn’t have any relation to race at all.
*I obviously don’t know 100% of his cases, but he definitely has a type of case he’s known for.
You don't seem to grasp that pain and suffering ( very lucrative in the USA ) is big bucks to the awarding family. Pain and suffering damages in Denmark is a foreign word. Who is questioning the pending lawsuit? It is not a matter of if but when.
Last edited:
Crump is a well known criminal injury lawyer among his talents , it just so happens he's been involved in a number of race related cases in the last few years.
Last edited:
FettFan
Well-Known Member
Yeah but even so, this is a legitimate case.
You want a lawyer joke?
Drive through Baton Rouge.
Crump was one of the attorneys suing Flint over drinking water and J&J over baby powder. He specializes in large injury and civil rights.
some other guy
Well-Known Member
Greg Angel on Twitter: "WEIGHT OF TRAGEDY: State released new docs th…
archived 28 Mar 2022 22:05:55 UTC
they've deleted the tweet, archive still works
Last edited:
The
Click on archive max weight for the ride is 286. The rider is reported to have weighed 330
News 13 keeping it classyGreg Angel on Twitter: "WEIGHT OF TRAGEDY: State released new docs th…
archived 28 Mar 2022 22:05:55 UTCarchive.ph
they've deleted the tweet, archive still works
View attachment 629166
Click on archive max weight for the ride is 286. The rider is reported to have weighed 330
Tom Morrow
Well-Known Member
I highly doubt that that was a posted boarding requirement, nor were they actively screening for that, though.
some other guy
Well-Known Member
tbdesu I'm surprised they'd bother to build a ride with a limit under at least three hundred in the USA lol
ITA
The limits was in the operations manual.
Orlando FreeFall rider death: Operations manual shows boy exceeded attraction's weight limits
The operations manual for Orlando FreeFall, the drop tower ride at ICON Park where a 14-year-old boy died last week after he seemingly fell out of the ride's restraints, indicates that the boy exceeded the ride's weight restrictions.
It may not be what killed him, and he probably wouldn't want people focusing on it, but if he exceeded the ride's weight limit and was allowed to ride, that's relevant information nonetheless. The thing is, rides (yes, particularly in America) are inevitably going to attract people who weigh more than 286. It's not a high enough limit to be a non-factor, and the ride ops probably aren't even taking that factor into consideration. Even if they wanted to, I don't believe they have any way of weighing guests before boarding. So now what? 
Vegas Disney Fan
Well-Known Member
I wonder if that places the blame solely on the operators and frees the ride manufacturer from liability?
Even with stated size limits I’m still bothered by the fact the safety system allowed the ride to operate with the restraint at such a big angle. Regardless of a riders weight the ability to run with that large a gap looks like a huge safety risk.
Even with stated size limits I’m still bothered by the fact the safety system allowed the ride to operate with the restraint at such a big angle. Regardless of a riders weight the ability to run with that large a gap looks like a huge safety risk.
Tom Morrow
Well-Known Member
So Fox Orlando obtained and posted the ride's operations manual:
I read the whole thing. A few takeaways:
- Extremely unprofessionally written and very ill-defined procedures, especially compared to what you would see from Disney and Universal.
- The ride has sensors on each harness that prevent it from starting if they are not down far enough. The problem is "down far enough for the ride to start" and "at a safe level" do not seem to be the same thing. If they were meant to be, then either they miscalculated when programming them or there was a malfunction. These are likely the lights that the operator in the video was referring to.
- The only guidance given for operators loading glarge guests is for the loader to visually determine if they are secure or not.
So, a combination of just having your operators essentially guess if the guest is secure, combined with a harness sensor that either isn't calibrated to give the "okay" at a safe distance or malfunctioned is unfathomably stupid. You NEVER leave a safety or boarding requirement up to the operator's interpretation. Any and all boarding restrictions must be a hard yes/no.
I read the whole thing. A few takeaways:
- Extremely unprofessionally written and very ill-defined procedures, especially compared to what you would see from Disney and Universal.
- The ride has sensors on each harness that prevent it from starting if they are not down far enough. The problem is "down far enough for the ride to start" and "at a safe level" do not seem to be the same thing. If they were meant to be, then either they miscalculated when programming them or there was a malfunction. These are likely the lights that the operator in the video was referring to.
- The only guidance given for operators loading glarge guests is for the loader to visually determine if they are secure or not.
So, a combination of just having your operators essentially guess if the guest is secure, combined with a harness sensor that either isn't calibrated to give the "okay" at a safe distance or malfunctioned is unfathomably stupid. You NEVER leave a safety or boarding requirement up to the operator's interpretation. Any and all boarding restrictions must be a hard yes/no.
I believe they could if they wanted to? When my wife and I took a flight on a very small aircraft over the Grand Canyon, every passenger was weighed before boarding to make sure weight was distributed evenly. Refuse to be weighed, didn't fly. I'm sure it would put a number of people off riding it as they wouldn't feel comfortable being weighed, but from a legal perspective with it being a health and safety issue it would be legally ok. Just think Disney measuring children's height to see if they can ride or not. Would take just seconds per customer and could be done for each ride during the time it takes to go round once.It may not be what killed him, and he probably wouldn't want people focusing on it, but if he exceeded the ride's weight limit and was allowed to ride, that's relevant information nonetheless. The thing is, rides (yes, particularly in America) are inevitably going to attract people who weigh more than 286. It's not a high enough limit to be a non-factor, and the ride ops probably aren't even taking that factor into consideration. Even if they wanted to, I don't believe they have any way of weighing guests before boarding. So now what?
Universal Orlando water parks has a few water slide ops that guests have to get on the scale prior to boarding. DAK has a optional paid tour of Wild Animal Trek where a guest cannot weigh more than 300 lbs due to guests walking over a bouncy high suspension bridge. If I recall doesn't WDW have a measuring wall on some ride attractions so the cast can use to see if the little ones are eligible to ride?
Patcheslee
Well-Known Member
Dollywoods drop tower has been closed. It's listed as one of the rides guests over 6'4" and 270lbs should utilize the test seat before attempting to ride. There is nothing on their website about absolute maximum heights or weights.