Mother of Disney's Monorail Pilot plans to sue

[dolphingirl47]

First off, criminality has a much higher burden of proof which must be met. Second, why shouldn't those who suffered the loss be the ones in some minimal way compensated? The reality is that, as with any business, the best way to ensure accidents don't happen twice is for them to have to pay (literally) for the ones that do happen.

Well, I was brought up with the concept of "innocent until proven guilty". If they cannot make criminal charges stick, the there should be no grounds for any civil lawsuit.

The thing is, at the moment, we simply do not know what caused this terrible and tragic accident. From the article that I read, it looks like that cutting costs and thereby cutting corners might well be the reason or at least might have contributed. The result of the investigation could be a completely different one. It could be a mechanical failure that nobody could have foreseen. It could be genuine human error or it could be negligence of an employee rather than Disney as a corporation.

In any case, it would be fairly unlikely that this would ever get anywhere near a court house. I would expect Disney to settle out of court without ever admitting any guilt (if they are in fact guilty), take the moral high ground and change precisely nothing. Actually, they might changes something: they might make even more cuts as the money for the settlement has to come from somewhere.

You say that is is only the fear of lawsuits that make the big corporations act. I am not too sure about this. I think with this sue happy culture, big corporations know that they can buy themselves out of just about any spot of bother.

Corinna

 

[KYMickey]

Well, I was brought up with the concept of "innocent until proven guilty". If they cannot make criminal charges stick, the there should be no grounds for any civil lawsuit.

Unfortunately that's not the case with our legal system, just ask O.J. Simpson!

 

[Abagpiper5]

Article in Orlando Sentinel...

Mother of Disney monorail pilot expects to sue Walt Disney Parks

Gee, no big surprise here.
It was an accident, not a on purpose.

 

[KINGBOBOFTHENORTH]

The settlements in lawsuits have gone up astronomically and you know who's paying? The people who buy the products and services US! The corporations are not being hurt by the big settlements, they just raise prices to cover the insurance required to cover the losses. People who get millions of dollars in settlements think they're hurting the corporation but in reality they are only hurting their friends and neighbors. Actually, the only people coming out ahead are the lawyers.

1. This is factually correct. Large corporations have large insurance policies to protect themselves from incidents like this. Accidents happen. But Disney isn't going to pay a judgment, their insurance company will. Simple as that.

2. As I mentioned earlier and has been confirmed by lawyers posting on other websites, Disney is an employer and the deceased was an employee. Both are subject to Florida's Workman's Compensation statute which absolves employers of liability in work-related accidents. In exchange employees gain immediate medical benefits and certain settlements. While there are exceptions in extreme cases (i.e. intentional acts to harm someone), this case is governed by the WC statute which will bar a lawsuit against Disney. The lawyer for the mother will try to sue everyone else too.....the train manufacturer, the signal manufacturer, the company that made overriding safety mechanisms a possibility, the manufacturer of the switch, etc. and try to blame them too. But a suit against Disney....probably would get dismissed pretty quickly.

3. There aren't going to be criminal charges against Disney or anyone else. There was no intent here; this was a horrible accident. The accident could have been prevented but that's called negligence. The WC statute bars negligence suits against fellow employees and employers.

4. That said, that does not mean Disney or their insurer won't attempt a settlement with the estate of the deceased. Their exemption under the WC statute will give them bargaining power but it is likely in their best interests to get the matter settled rather than let it drag out. After all, the deceased WAS likely an innocent victim.

5. For all of you who are so mad at the mother for contemplating a suit, keep in mind that MONEY is the only way to compensate victims. One can't give 50 lashes to those responsible, one can't bring the deceased back. The only way we can try to equate things in a modern society is with money. That's just the reality.

BobK/Orlando

 

[KYMickey]

1. This is factually correct. Large corporations have large insurance policies to protect themselves from incidents like this. Accidents happen. But Disney isn't going to pay a judgment, their insurance company will. Simple as that.

Nor do you think the insurance company gets their money? From their policyholders! Whether we ourselves are policyholders or Disney is the money for the premiums still comes out of our pockets in one way or another. No matter how you look at it in the end the visitors to Disney are going to end up footing the bill for any settlement! No ifs ands or buts.

 

[KINGBOBOFTHENORTH]

Nor do you think the insurance company gets their money? From their policyholders! Whether we ourselves are policyholders or Disney is the money for the premiums still comes out of our pockets in one way or another. No matter how you look at it in the end the visitors to Disney are going to end up footing the bill for any settlement! No ifs ands or buts.

Absoultely. An insurance company's rates are based on loss experience, expenses in running the business plus a margin for profit. Insurance is a very competitive business so rates are not raised just because they want to. A bad loss experience is what leads to higher rates. As you said, ultimately Disney customers will foot the bill.

BobK/Orlando