Mother of Disney's Monorail Pilot plans to sue

[zulemara]

edit: apparently there is a gag order I didn't know about so I can't say anything...gggrrr

 

[Horace Horsecollar]

I realize some people would like to believe this was nothing but an unavoidable, freak accident. However, the growing evidence suggests that this is not the case.

This July 16, 2009, MousePlanet article by journalist David Koenig is worth reading:

Carelessness Kills: Monorail drivers lay blame for fatal crash on sloppiness and short-cuts

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

I realize some people would like to believe this was nothing but an unavoidable, freak accident. However, the growing evidence suggests that this is not the case.

This July 16, 2009, MouePlanet article by journalist David Koenig is worth reading:

Carelessness Kills: Monorail drivers lay blame for fatal crash on sloppiness and short-cuts

Great article HH, I suppose some apologists will explain anything Disney does away and so be it. But a young man is dead before his life even began and if a huge monetary judgement is the way Disney will most feel the impact then give the mother the money. If she feels it's ill gotten gains there is much goodwill via charites she can use it on.
pirate

 

[Kim&Chris]

I realize some people would like to believe this was nothing but an unavoidable, freak accident. However, the growing evidence suggests that this is not the case.

This July 16, 2009, MouePlanet article by journalist David Koenig is worth reading:

Carelessness Kills: Monorail drivers lay blame for fatal crash on sloppiness and short-cuts

VERY interesting. Thank you for posting this.

 

[LimeGreenEd]

It's clear enough that SOMETHING went wrong--but what?? And could/should it have been prevented under normal and accepted saftey procedures, inspections, etc??
Both large questions that need an answer before "responsibility" can be determined.

Hopefully, most of the people here will never have to serve on a personal injury lawsuit jury. Most seem to have made up their minds that Disney was at fault without having any evidence other than hearsay. No wonder there are so many multi-million dollar judgements awarded.

 

[jheigl]

I don't know who's at fault, and I'm not saying that sueing is right or wrong in this case, but in general our country is so sue happy as if it is a get rich quick scheme....accidents do happen and it is unfortunate that in some cases it claims lives, but from some reports it seems as if the supervisor was giving orders without being there (if I am hearing correctly)? If this is the case, I don't think Disney chouls be held liable...rather, the supervisor should be sued....but I don't know if that is the true story or whatever....

With that being said...if I was in the same position, I'm not sure what I would do. I can't blame the family, nor can I, at this point, blame Disney. But as a whole, my feeling is that it is a shame that our country cannot understand that accidents do happen and they truly are unfortunate...but it, in my opinion, shouldn't be grounds for getting rich just for the sake of getting rich.

 

[Traveliz]

I don't know who's at fault, and I'm not saying that sueing is right or wrong in this case, but in general our country is so sue happy as if it is a get rich quick scheme....accidents do happen and it is unfortunate that in some cases it claims lives, but from some reports it seems as if the supervisor was giving orders without being there (if I am hearing correctly)? If this is the case, I don't think Disney chouls be held liable...rather, the supervisor should be sued....but I don't know if that is the true story or whatever....

With that being said...if I was in the same position, I'm not sure what I would do. I can't blame the family, nor can I, at this point, blame Disney. But as a whole, my feeling is that it is a shame that our country cannot understand that accidents do happen and they truly are unfortunate...but it, in my opinion, shouldn't be grounds for getting rich just for the sake of getting rich.

I doubt the mom is taking action to get rich - I don't think there has been any mention of that in any articles.

I also believe the supervisor was on a meal break off site and it was accepted practice (meaning Disney allowed this).

Liz

 

[jheigl]

I doubt the mom is taking action to get rich - I don't think there has been any mention of that in any articles.

I also believe the supervisor was on a meal break off site and it was accepted practice (meaning Disney allowed this).

Liz

I meant to write that part in there about the mom not doing it to get rich...it was more of a general sentence more than it was about this particular incident. Like I said, if I was in the situation, I don't know what I would do!

The idea of accepted practice is vague to me because here at my work we have accepted practices between us co-workers that are not recognized or accepted by our employer, but they do not know about the these and it does not affect anything. So to say that it is an accepted practice which means Disney allowed it COULD be innacurate. Given Disney's history and current ways of doing things regarding safety (standing behind the yellow lines for the trams, etc), I doubt this was a known thing by Disney and accepted by them!

 

[Traveliz]

I meant to write that part in there about the mom not doing it to get rich...it was more of a general sentence more than it was about this particular incident. Like I said, if I was in the situation, I don't know what I would do!

The idea of accepted practice is vague to me because here at my work we have accepted practices between us co-workers that are not recognized or accepted by our employer, but they do not know about the these and it does not affect anything. So to say that it is an accepted practice which means Disney allowed it COULD be innacurate. Given Disney's history and current ways of doing things regarding safety (standing behind the yellow lines for the trams, etc), I doubt this was a known thing by Disney and accepted by them!

I do believe that it is allowed (or was) for supervisors to be offsite for meal breaks - if they were indeed on a break. I also believe the supervisor ended up sort of being on call because of the other employee who ended up leaving work sick. It's all written up on one of the threads (that may no longer be out there).

Having friends and family that work at Disney I know that there is not much variance from what is accepted by coworkers and what is actually allowed. There is so much by the book and not much leeway.

Liz

 

[jheigl]

break is totally different than someone being on duty and leaving to go to a restaurant. There really is no sense in speculating until the facts are released or confirmed, but to me there is a difference in a break vs. leaving while on duty.

 

[TheRustyScupper]

she does not need to find a lawyer who will charge her 30-40% of any settlement or results.

However, since she obviously has retained a (greedy) attorney Disney will not talk to her and she will lose over 1/3 of any monies to the lawyer.

1) Usually, I agree with your responses and replies.
2) In this case, I think you are in err.
3) Disney, if left to their own devices, would probably offer an apology.
4) Not a good settlement.
5) I think she needs a lawyer to improve her settlement.

NOTE: Although not involved in a big case, I was asked several questions once for a minor Disney guest (slip-and-all) accident. I was specifically told not to say anything to anyone else, especially the guest's lawyer. I was told that statements might increase the guest's claim.

 

[dolphingirl47]

I have to say this whole issue makes me sick to the stomach. If there is evidence that Disney was negligent, then criminal charges should be brought against them. They should be punished if any criminal conduct is established and they should also be made to put in place new technology, work practices or whatever necessary to prevent a horrible accident like this to ever happen again. Having read the article, if even half of this is true (and I am inclined to believe all of it is), then Disney needs a kick up the behind and definitely needs to be made accountable.

Suing Disney for compensation is not going to make this happen. It might actually be counterproductive. First of all, agreeing to a settlement might well make Disney feel that they are absolved of all blame thereafter. Another issue is that Disney are most certainly feeling the pinch at the moment. It could well be that money that would better be used to make the mono rail safer (staving, more maintenance, extra security systems, etc) would be spent on compensation instead.

If the driver had a wife and young kids or other dependents (and I think we had read by now if this was a case) then I think a case could and should be made that they will be properly looked after and in this case a settlement would be appropriate. It really worries me that people who should be grieving for, from what I have read and videos that I have seen, an absolutely amazing young man suddenly have Dollar signs in front of their eyes.

Corinna

 

[Dznefreek]

If the driver had a wife and young kids or other dependents (and I think we had read by now if this was a case) then I think a case could and should be made

The hardest thing to do as a parent is bury one of your children . . . . . . . . nuff said . . .

 

[dolphingirl47]

The hardest thing to do as a parent is bury one of your children . . . . . . . . nuff said . . .

I do not doubt this for a minute, but no lawsuit will make this easier and no settlement, however big, will take away the pain.

Corinna

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

I do not doubt this for a minute, but no lawsuit will make this easier and no settlement, however big, will take away the pain.

Corinna

Yes it will. We are a revenge oriented society these days and people want whatever "blood" they can get in return for being wronged and in this case a stiff monetary penalty against a negligent corporation is the best a grieving family can do. It may not truly take away the pain but they will be at least a little satisfied in knowing they did whatever they could to make "them" pay.

Further, to all of those who make light of this sue happy society just how '"responsible" do you think big corporations would be were there no threat of a massive lawsuit for their misdeeds hanging over their heards? You think they really care about their workers? LOL!!!

 

[jheigl]

Yes it will. We are a revenge oriented society these days and people want whatever "blood" they can get in return for being wronged and in this case a stiff monetary penalty against a negligent corporation is the best a grieving family can do. It may not truly take away the pain but they will be at least a little satisfied in knowing they did whatever they could to make "them" pay.

Further, to all of those who make light of this sue happy society just how '"responsible" do you think big corporations would be were there no threat of a massive lawsuit for their misdeeds hanging over their heards? You think they really care about their workers? LOL!!!

Not disagreeing with you, but things seemed to be a lot different years ago...granted I may have been young, but from what I have heard from many many people is that today's society is much more greedy and sue happy than that of just 15 years ago and more...

 

[KYMickey]

Not disagreeing with you, but things seemed to be a lot different years ago...granted I may have been young, but from what I have heard from many many people is that today's society is much more greedy and sue happy than that of just 15 years ago and more...

What you are saying is definitely true! 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.

 

[Rip]

They are a predatory greedy company so I don't understand your point. She has to have lawyers look after her interest or Disney's lawyers will do their thing ... And if you think that's going to be in her best interest you're sadly mistaken.

Also, KMK, there is already enough public knowledge of what happened to be quite certain that Austin was not negligent in any way.

Dude, I've noticed in the two threads I've seen her in today that KMK would defend Disney if they set up a cat-bowling attraction and charged admission.

Actually, I may join her in that one!

 

[Rip]

1) Usually, I agree with your responses and replies.
2) In this case, I think you are in err.
3) Disney, if left to their own devices, would probably offer an apology.
4) Not a good settlement.
5) I think she needs a lawyer to improve her settlement.

NOTE: Although not involved in a big case, I was asked several questions once for a minor Disney guest (slip-and-all) accident. I was specifically told not to say anything to anyone else, especially the guest's lawyer. I was told that statements might increase the guest's claim.

Pretty much SOP for anyone, really. I realize that some people like to believe in altruism, but the reality is that Disney is a corporation just like any other, and they will act in their own self-interests, just like any other.

Does that make them a greedy, evil corporation? No, it makes them pretty much what every other entity is.

 

[Rip]

I have to say this whole issue makes me sick to the stomach. If there is evidence that Disney was negligent, then criminal charges should be brought against them. They should be punished if any criminal conduct is established and they should also be made to put in place new technology, work practices or whatever necessary to prevent a horrible accident like this to ever happen again. Having read the article, if even half of this is true (and I am inclined to believe all of it is), then Disney needs a kick up the behind and definitely needs to be made accountable.

Suing Disney for compensation is not going to make this happen. It might actually be counterproductive. First of all, agreeing to a settlement might well make Disney feel that they are absolved of all blame thereafter. Another issue is that Disney are most certainly feeling the pinch at the moment. It could well be that money that would better be used to make the mono rail safer (staving, more maintenance, extra security systems, etc) would be spent on compensation instead.

If the driver had a wife and young kids or other dependents (and I think we had read by now if this was a case) then I think a case could and should be made that they will be properly looked after and in this case a settlement would be appropriate. It really worries me that people who should be grieving for, from what I have read and videos that I have seen, an absolutely amazing young man suddenly have Dollar signs in front of their eyes.

Corinna

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.