My condolences to the family, but WTF !

Another example of out of control lawsuits and greed.

http://www.newsobserver.com/167/story/487749.html

 

This most likely is all about money to support the family and a big payday for the lawyers. Most of the product liability lawsuits today are about finding the deep pockets for a big payday.

I do agree that using a motorcycle for high speed pursuits is not smart. One oil spot or gravel spot on the road and you are down on your butt. Sounds like more of a training issue with the police dept involved to me.

 

I rented an Electra Glide earlier this year and rode from L.A. to Vegas and back (about 650 miles). I got her up over 85 more than a few times, and never experienced any handling or stability issues whatsoever. I highly doubt there is a design flaw at work here.

Cheers!
[sm=icon_rock.gif][sm=icon_rock.gif][sm=icon_rock.gif]

 

That was a pretty well balanced article. I have no problem with a suit in this case, allowing the process to decide whether or not these Electra Glides were capable of performing up to the manufacturer's claims. The benefits of being able to bring suits like this are better and safer products that we can enjoy. If facts show no defect or fault of the dealer or manufacturer, then we can be reassured also. But we need the civil process to decide if in fact there was fault on the part of HD or the dealer. If I was the lawyer, I think I would have gone after the outfit that left the cement bag on the shoulder though. That actually caused the accident.

 

Well said...if not for the ability to bring lawsuits against manufacturers products would not be nearly as safe. This has been proven time and again.

 

I have a problem with a suit in this case, as our civil suits work now. Even if Harley has throngs & throngs of data supporting their claim that the motorcycle performs as promised. Even if it's proven that this was not and is not a manufacturers defect. The Motor Co. has the cards stacked against them when the jury sees a tearful widow and a fatherless little girl. It's gonna cost the Motor Co. big $$$ to simply defend themselves. Those bucks come back to me & you and are part of the reason we're paying $20 for a chrome bolt. So, the Motor Co. will probably just settle for a few mills out-of-court, the lawyers will take 1/2 of it (or more) and the real investigation we need will never happen and the results of such an investigation will never become public knowledge.

I think both sides should be allowed to present their case. Then a rational judge should decide based simply on the facts and law regarding liability, not on pulled heartstrings. Then, if it's found that the Motor. Co. is at fault - make a fair and reasonable award to the survivors. If it's found that the Motor Co. is not liable, then the Motor Co should be awarded the cost of their defense from those bringing the suit. Loser pays.

Jury's are not smart enough to distinguish between factual liability and feeling sorry for someone. They're always gonna sway toward taking some money from the big-bad company and giving it to the poor little girl who's Daddy died. The lawyers bringing the suits understand this, that's why they bring them. The companies being sued understand this, that's why the settle out of court and make all sign hush documents. This is the way it works today and we (the public) don't get the safer products because the facts never come to light. We just get the added cost.

Sales and competition drives products to be made better and safer, not lawsuits. Name 1 thing on your modern Harley, there to make it safer, that was instigated by a lawsuit!?
Dave

 

So... not sure about the wobble thing. I remember when this accident happened... and the story has changed A LOT since it happened. 4 years ago they said that he was clipped by a car and that was how he went down. Now they are saying wind from a trailer and a bag of cement... Dunno.

I can ALMOST see the lawsuit against Harley... but not against Ray Price. The wobble "fix" is a modification to the mounting of the engine that a dealership is NOT authorized to do. So if he brings it in and there is nothing outside of what the MoCo says is doable... what do you do? And at any rate... one would think he should have been able to bring it in to the motor poole and have them either issue another ride or fix it themselves. I know for a FACT that the State Trooper's motor poole modifies the Crown Vics as they see fit regardless of Ford being up for it.

It was a terrible thing... And I feel bad for the family... But I think the lawsuit is a bunch of crap. Anyone that lives here KNOWs that part of 440 is total crap. Pieces of the roadway are coming up all over the place and DOT has done NOTHING to fix it. It has been like that the 10 years I have lived here. And I cannot recall a morning that has not had a ladder, bucket, or some other stupid thing in the middle of that road in the morning.

Perhaps if they started enforcing the laws about untied cargo... Less of this crap would happen.

 

Jury's are not smart enough? Do you support the death penalty? I trust the American system of justice. Sure lets just implement the changes that you have suggested. Not all cases involve clear libility. What you propose would not help. Most persons in need of the court system could never pay even if they lost, and those who had resources would not persue valid claims for fear that a jury wasnt smart enough to figure it out. What would work would be to bifurcate all trials into liability and compensation phases.

WHich happens a lot more than you are probably aware. Harley isnt paying the cost of defense on these cases. They are paying insurance premiums. However, insurance executives have admitted under oath in senate committies that tort reform will not lessen the burden to thier inusred. So even if we implemented what you want we end up with the following:
suits going to trial where the losers do not have the ability to pay the cost of defense when they lose;
people with good cases scared to take thier cases to trial because there is always a possibility of losing;
Harley paying the same amount in insurance and us paying the same amount for bolts;
and insurance companies making even more profits.

If cases were bifurcated into liability phases it would allow the first phase to come to trial quicker, there would be no crying widows on the stand, and if there were a finding of liability there would be incentive for the defendants to settle, and you would not lose one of your fundamental rights promised by the Constitution. JMO
[quote]ORIGINAL: GADave


I have a problem with a suit in this case, as our civil suits work now. Even if Harley has throngs & throngs of data supporting their claim that the motorcycle performs as promised. Even if it's proven that this was not and is not a manufacturers defect. The Motor Co. has the cards stacked against them when the jury sees a tearful widow and a fatherless little girl. It's gonna cost the Motor Co. big $$$ to simply defend themselves. Those bucks come back to me & you and are part of the reason we're paying $20 for a chrome bolt. So, the Motor Co. will probably just settle for a few mills out-of-court, the lawyers will take 1/2 of it (or more) and the real investigation we need will never happen and the results of such an investigation will never become public knowledge.

I think both sides should be allowed to present their case. Then a rational judge should decide based simply on the facts and law regarding liability, not on pulled heartstrings. Then, if it's found that the Motor. Co. is at fault - make a fair and reasonable award to the survivors. If it's found that the Motor Co. is not liable, then the Motor Co should be awarded the cost of their defense from those bringing the suit. Loser pays.

Jury's are not smart enough to distinguish between factual liability and feeling sorry for someone. They're always gonna sway toward taking some money from the big-bad company and giving it to the poor little girl who's Daddy died. The lawyers bringing the suits understand this, that's why they bring them. The companies being sued understand this, that's why the settle out of court and make all sign hush docu

 

One thing safer on a motorcycle brought about by lawsuits......headlights that stay on full time, horns, turn signals....on automobiles..padded dashes nuetral safety switches, seatbelts, air bags, gas tank configurations, antilock brakes, stability features, tempered glass, safety glass, that little warning on your mirrors....the market is controlled by profit not safety....only when companies are faced with paying those they injure does the market become involved. Ever heard of the Pinto....companies will make safe products if it is in thier financial best interest to do so.

 

if the bike handled bably in the first place, why'd he chase the suspect? our local police agency cant pursue on thier harleys because of policy already in place. what i understand police departments lease harleys through harley for only $1.00 a month! (talk about biting the mouth that feeds ya). there are a lot of cicumstances involved in this, but i agree with GADAVE. heck, why not sue the concrete bag manufacturer because the concrete didnt give on impact!?