Chi84
Premium Member
That’s fine. I was just pointing out the fact that lawyers do this for strategic reasons that have nothing to do with the merits of the lawsuit. Your personal feelings are your own.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney sued over a wedgie at TL
- Thread starter Touchdown
- Start date
That would be found in the court filing. Obviously, it's sad that someone could get injured at a waterpark, and in my opinion, if this particular ride was inherently dangerous to the point that Disney is negligent by letting people go down it, then it should be closed. However, past history would indicate that relatively few people have been injured plummeting down this slide, and that would support the argument that this is a freak accident, the kind disclaimed by "at your own risk" warnings and instructions on how to ride safely.
I could see Disney doing their part to minimize bad publicity over this by settling for demonstrated medical expenses and some goodwill beyond that.
Nubs70
Well-Known Member
Once you get to the horizontal runout, you come up against water, which is incompressible. If you are large enough to where the water has nowhere to go, your fat will hydroplane.
Dead2009
Horror Movie Guru
"The suit alleges that Disney “was negligent and breached its duties of reasonable care” in failing to provide protective clothing, such as shorts, for the slide; failing to warn McGuinness and other women of the risks; and other design and safety failures."
It's not Disney's job to give you shorts to ride a water slide. Anyone with half a brain should know how going down a water slide at a high rate of speed goes and if you dont....you should probably do your research.
It's not Disney's job to give you shorts to ride a water slide. Anyone with half a brain should know how going down a water slide at a high rate of speed goes and if you dont....you should probably do your research.
JoeCamel
Well-Known Member
Two day passes to TL?
Rhinocerous
Premium Member
Comparing Walt Disney World to Action Park is like comparing Animal Kingdom to a cheap roadside carnival.
Okay, bad example.
Tom Morrow
Well-Known Member
On one hand, big corporations are really good at spinning actual lawsuits as frivolous. The infamous McDonalds hot coffee case is the most famous example. "Haha, coffee is hot, how dumb do you have to be?" But what those people don't know is that the coffee was so hat that it mutilated her genitals and she needed skin grafts. Coffee is never supposed to be THAT hot. In the end it was discovered that McDonalds was serving the coffee at levels far beyond safe to save a little money. It was not a frivolous case, but McDonalds' PR team successfully spun it as one in the eyes of the public for a long time.
On the other hand, this slide has been open for over 30 years? How did it take so long for an injury like this to happen?
On the other hand, this slide has been open for over 30 years? How did it take so long for an injury like this to happen?
Juries can feel sympathy for the person like recently in Ft Lauderdale a jury awarded $800K to an 8 year old girl who was severely burned by McDonalds chicken mcnuggets on her leg. The family originally sued the Golden Arches for $15M.
Why does the suit , put forward by the claimant's lawyers , specifically say "injurious wedgie" ?
Perhaps they have read the article
I would think one of the courses lawyers took in law school was called Creative Writing 101.Why does the suit , put forward by the claimant's lawyers , specifically say "injurious wedgie" ?
Perhaps they have read the article
phillip9698
Well-Known Member
It’s almost like the wedgie aspect is being focused on to get people to dismiss this as fraud. From what I’m reading, these injuries go well beyond wedgie.
Ricky Spanish
Well-Known Member
We call that “Donald Ducking it”
EricsBiscuit
Well-Known Member
I would be shocked if this suit (no pun intended!) Survives the motion to dismiss. For any negligence case, the plaintiff has to show that the defendant breached the Standard of Care that a reasonable person would show. In this case, her case admits that Disney told her how to cross her legs. There is no breach of the SoC. The SoC is determined in part also by custom of the industry. In other words, even if someone thought this was Disney’s fault, since nobody in the industry provides special trunks for slides of this type (to my knowledge), and since Disney does have signs on every ride warning guests, along with instruction on how to go down safely, this suit has very little merit as a negligence case. That being said, trial is very expensive. Disney might not want to risk a trial if the motion for dismissal fails. I think this will most likely be settled out of court.
Edie’s to add: and even if there was a breach, it would have to cause the damages. Perhaps if Disney didn’t tell her to cross her legs, there would be a breach. But that is not what the suit says.
Edie’s to add: and even if there was a breach, it would have to cause the damages. Perhaps if Disney didn’t tell her to cross her legs, there would be a breach. But that is not what the suit says.
Drdcm
Well-Known Member
I know. Wasn’t making a comparison.
The situation just made me think of that documentary and I thought I’d mention it if people were interested in crazy unregulated water parks that were allowed to operate for years.
KrzyKtty
Well-Known Member
I have honestly avoided this slide, and others like it for years because I always assumed it would annihilate my back. That being said, like some others, I am going to reserve judgment on the case. To much is unknown right now. That being said, this is a long time for a slide to operate without causing this sort of injury before. Granted, an internal hernia is one hell of an injury...
I am leaning towards not believing that Disney made any malicious negligence or design mistakes; however, even a freak accident probably deserves at least medical coverage. Thought that doesn't warrant a law suit one would hope.
I am leaning towards not believing that Disney made any malicious negligence or design mistakes; however, even a freak accident probably deserves at least medical coverage. Thought that doesn't warrant a law suit one would hope.
Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
How many hundreds of folks go down that slide per day? Anyone have any data?
Weather_Lady
Well-Known Member
I'm convinced that they only filed a lawsuit after demand letters failed to result in a meaningful settlement offer. That's usually how these things go.
Also, we have no idea whether, or how many, people get injured on that slide every year. Some people might be embarrassed to report the injury or are content with the extent to which their medical insurance covers their costs, and if they seek compensation from Disney and are offered a settlement, settlements generally include non-disclosure clauses.
KrzyKtty
Well-Known Member
All very true, and we all know Disney lawyers are very effective bullies.