Disney denies fault in monorail crash

[jakeman]

Even if they got bad press, how many of you would quit giving them your money? Seriously.

The folks that patron this and other boards? Probably very few.

I don't think that it what is being said, but it is a tarnish to their reputation to not just take their whippings and move on.

Does it affect us and how we spend our money? Me personally, no.

Could it affect the general public perception and turn people off from going, maybe.

 

[wm49rs]

Did anyone really think Disney would accept fault in the midst of a civil lawsuit?

 

[FreedomWrangler]

Wow, this thread lawyer'd up fairly quick...like it was being sued for negligence or posters compensation.

 

[monorail81]

Does anyone have a copy of the Complaint on the case and Disney's Answer? I can't get to the Orange County Courthouse beacuse I don't live there anymore, or I'd already have one. None of the news stations have them posted either, which I find odd since they have EVERYTHING posted regarding the Casey Anthony trial...

 

[biggiedisney123]

I heard

all hearsay, but when I was there in the end of January, it was a rainy day, and I heard one monorail attendant say to the other one, "great, more rain, blue has enough trouble stopping already."

I still rode blue. lol

 

[Tinkermommy]

Nope, but I would like to see them. They are probably fairly brief as the news media did not report many facts.

 

[jakeman]

Did anyone really think Disney would accept fault in the midst of a civil lawsuit?

Not really, but I think most of us would expect a quiet pay off to make it go away.

A jury is pretty much the exact opposite of that.

 

[wm49rs]

Not really, but I think most of us would expect a quiet pay off to make it go away.

A jury is pretty much the exact opposite of that.

As someone astutely mentioned before, it's all a negotiating tactic....

 

[Wilt Dasney]

Was Disney required to enter some kind of response (plea), regardless of any intention to settle? If so, this is probably much less newsworthy than we're making out.

 

[jakeman]

As someone astutely mentioned before, it's all a negotiating tactic....

I saw that and it makes sense, but how often do you see a company use such a tactic that would draw attention to a failing theirs?

It's just not something I have commonly seen, although my legal experience is limited to the occasional Law & Order rerun.

 

[GrumpyFan]

It was my understanding that the employees that were involved in the situation leading up to the accident were not following the companies properly laid out safety guidelines and were not fully aware of the situation. So if the actions of the employees does not match the required guidelines of the company, does that mean Disney as a whole is still at fault, or does the blame switch over to the employees for not following the proper safety protocols set fourth by the company? :shrug:

I would venture to agree with you on this angle. Essentially, it appears that they're placing blame on human or even mechanical failure beyond their control, not policy or established safety guidelines that had they been followed would have prevented this.

 

[wm49rs]

I saw that and it makes sense, but how often do you see a company use such a tactic that would draw attention to a failing theirs?

It's just not something I have commonly seen, although my legal experience is limited to the occasional Law & Order rerun.

They were required to answer the suit. What are they going to say? They'll deny any fault until an agreement can be reached, one that pays monetary damages but does not assess any fault on the part of Disney. Corporations settle suits along these lines quite regularly....

 

[Eyorefan]

Was Disney required to enter some kind of response (plea), regardless of any intention to settle? If so, this is probably much less newsworthy than we're making out.

Just to put this all in perspective I am a paralegal worked in Labor and Employment litigation for almost 10 years. Most of the case I have worked on were scheduled for a jury trial. I have worked on exactly 1 case that not only went to trial, but actual went all the way to the jury verdict.

All the stuff going on in the case right now is just normal filings. The plaintiffs filed their complaint and the defense answered. Its just first step in a long process that will take years... don't expect to see anything substantive about this anytime soon.

 

[Eyorefan]

They were required to answer the suit. What are they going to say? They'll deny any fault until an agreement can be reached, one that pays monetary damages but does not assess any fault on the part of Disney. Corporations settle suits along these lines quite regularly....

Exactly... You can't NOT file an answer when someone sues you. If you are served with a law suite and you don't file an answer the judge will hit you with a default judgement so you HAVE file an answer, even if you know you are going to settle it later. All this stuff is just procedural and means nothing.

 

[Wilt Dasney]

Just to put this all in perspective I am a paralegal worked in Labor and Employment litigation for almost 10 years. Most of the case I have worked on were scheduled for a jury trial. I have worked on exactly 1 case that not only went to trial, but actual went all the way to the jury verdict.

All the stuff going on in the case right now is just normal filings. The plaintiffs filed their complaint and the defense answered. Its just first step in a long process that will take years... don't expect to see anything substantive about this anytime soon.

Would be nice if the folks at the Sentinel kept a source or 2 with specialized legal knowledge like yours on speed dial. A line or two about the bigger significance (or lack thereof) of this filing would have helped the story.

 

[jakeman]

They were required to answer the suit. What are they going to say? They'll deny any fault until an agreement can be reached, one that pays monetary damages but does not assess any fault on the part of Disney. Corporations settle suits along these lines quite regularly....

Just to put this all in perspective I am a paralegal worked in Labor and Employment litigation for almost 10 years. Most of the case I have worked on were scheduled for a jury trial. I have worked on exactly 1 case that not only went to trial, but actual went all the way to the jury verdict.

All the stuff going on in the case right now is just normal filings. The plaintiffs filed their complaint and the defense answered. Its just first step in a long process that will take years... don't expect to see anything substantive about this anytime soon.

Exactly... You can't NOT file an answer when someone sues you. If you are served with a law suite and you don't file an answer the judge will hit you with a default judgement so you HAVE file an answer, even if you know you are going to settle it later. All this stuff is just procedural and means nothing.

Ah, thank you. I did not know any of that.

Probably should start watching the original Law & Order and not just SVU. :lol:

Would be nice if the folks at the Sentinel kept a source or 2 with specialized legal knowledge like yours on speed dial. A line or two about the bigger significance (or lack thereof) of this filing would have helped the story.

I agree. However, we should just be lucky the bus crash today didn't mention the monorail accident.

 

[Master Yoda]

Ah, thank you. I did not know any of that.

Probably should start watching the original Law & Order and not just SVU. :lol:

I agree. However, we should just be lucky the bus crash today didn't mention the monorail accident.

I would just skip them both and just start watching more Mythbusters.:lol: