CGT lawsuit filed.
05-09-2006, 09:57 AM
#586
Race Director
Originally Posted by Irishdriver
So what is it going to be achieved except money for lawyers and a restriction of choice for the US people?
Nothing will be achieved except what you mention.
Well said.
05-09-2006, 12:15 PM
#588
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by icon
nick, it is kind of peculiar that you havent mentioned the dangerous pit exit in relation to the outcropping of solid concrete wall.
or anything about the ferrari that was the possible cause for the lose of control.
that leads people to believe the above post!
or anything about the ferrari that was the possible cause for the lose of control.
that leads people to believe the above post!
Irishdriver, you sound like a reasonable person. Yet you allow your bias against US lawyers and its legal system to prejudge the CGT case. Let the facts play out.
If Porche is culpable hopefully other car manufactuers will learn and act accordingly. In the end, we will have safer high performance cars and better drivers. The US legal system identifies and corrects unreasonably unsafe products. Most of the world has benefitted from our legal system including Europe.
05-09-2006, 01:28 PM
#589
Drifting
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Munich
Posts: 2,722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Nick
If Porche is culpable hopefully other car manufactuers will learn and act accordingly. In the end, we will have safer high performance cars and better drivers. The US legal system identifies and corrects unreasonably unsafe products. Most of the world has benefitted from our legal system including Europe.
You must be delusional, or a lawyer, or both, in which case I should address you as:
Nick Esq.
'Most of the world has benefitted from the American legal system' - don't make me laugh, in fact you make me very angry. Go to Africa, go and look at the AIDS victims whose access to affordable AIDS drugs was delayed unconsionably by the drug companies IP attorneys seeking to protect their employer's lucrative patents.
It was US lawyers who almost drove Audi out of America. It is US lawyers who make many non-US manufacturers reluctant to do business with the US.
The US Founding Fathers set up some wonderful principles by which to run nations. It would appear that ever since, the lawyers have attempted to destroy those fine principles. Not even the Supreme Courrt is exempt from reasonable accusations of chicanery and special interest. It greatly saddens me.
Just because lawyers have forgotten that if you lie down with swine you get up smelling of ****, it doesn't mean the rest of us have lost our sense of smell.
Now as somebody of European heritage and proud of my links to the founding fathers of the US, I say, on behalf of Europe, 'America - take your legal system and stuff it up', we need it like fish need bicycles!
Now don't get me wrong, I like America, I like Americans, however I find your attitude self delusional and patronising.
If you think this is rude, you should have seen what I have edited out.
R+C
05-09-2006, 02:16 PM
#590
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
"The US legal system identifies and corrects unreasonably unsafe products."
{as opposed to reasonably unsafe ones?}
Sorry to break the news, however, justice (esp tort law) in America is a profitable Business Case for sophisticated participants, with $s extracted based upon their capacity to manipulate the process to personal advantage. If this one proceeds, we will observe a fine case exemplar close up.
{as opposed to reasonably unsafe ones?}
Sorry to break the news, however, justice (esp tort law) in America is a profitable Business Case for sophisticated participants, with $s extracted based upon their capacity to manipulate the process to personal advantage. If this one proceeds, we will observe a fine case exemplar close up.
05-09-2006, 02:33 PM
#591
Rennlist Member
Irishdriver,
I think OJ's verdict was related to the quality of his jury more than his lawyer. But that's a clear example of failure of the system. Not that OJ didn't have a point....
Nordschleife, Just today I read that an African nation wanted to sue Pfizer for lack of informed consent on the use of an antibiotic that was associated with bad outcomes in children with meningitis. (Trovan, by recollection). It seems that everybody wants the bucks, when they get close enough to smell them. Pfizer made an excellent product available for free. But it didn't work out. Should the indignet mom's of kids who were going to die anyway be enriched in the process? Or should Pfizer have obtained informed consent? They apparantly forged documents later.
As someone who has reviewed hundreds of personal injury cases as an expert witness, the bigger problems is the size of jury awards. In the vast majority of the cases I've reviewed, somebody screwed up and somebody else got hurt. The juries can get a little exhuberant. But, overall, I'd rather trust a jury than a judge.
The process is actually very enlightening, a vast amount of research is done, and ultimately becomes public information. Since none of us know what will be found in internal documents, external analysis, intra-departmental e mails, etc, we may be in for a surprise.
What would you say if an internal document were uncovered that did reveal knowledge of a problem? Maybe it won't happen, but stranger things have. In one law suit, is saw internal memo's that said, "In event we are sued, we will just say this___"
I think that is the essence of Nick's point. Since he didn't create the system, not everything wrong with it is his direct fault. Are we shooting the messenger? AS
I think OJ's verdict was related to the quality of his jury more than his lawyer. But that's a clear example of failure of the system. Not that OJ didn't have a point....
Nordschleife, Just today I read that an African nation wanted to sue Pfizer for lack of informed consent on the use of an antibiotic that was associated with bad outcomes in children with meningitis. (Trovan, by recollection). It seems that everybody wants the bucks, when they get close enough to smell them. Pfizer made an excellent product available for free. But it didn't work out. Should the indignet mom's of kids who were going to die anyway be enriched in the process? Or should Pfizer have obtained informed consent? They apparantly forged documents later.
As someone who has reviewed hundreds of personal injury cases as an expert witness, the bigger problems is the size of jury awards. In the vast majority of the cases I've reviewed, somebody screwed up and somebody else got hurt. The juries can get a little exhuberant. But, overall, I'd rather trust a jury than a judge.
The process is actually very enlightening, a vast amount of research is done, and ultimately becomes public information. Since none of us know what will be found in internal documents, external analysis, intra-departmental e mails, etc, we may be in for a surprise.
What would you say if an internal document were uncovered that did reveal knowledge of a problem? Maybe it won't happen, but stranger things have. In one law suit, is saw internal memo's that said, "In event we are sued, we will just say this___"
I think that is the essence of Nick's point. Since he didn't create the system, not everything wrong with it is his direct fault. Are we shooting the messenger? AS
05-09-2006, 04:15 PM
#594
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by Nordschleife
Nick
You must be delusional, or a lawyer, or both, in which case I should address you as:
Nick Esq.
!
Now don't get me wrong, I like America, I like Americans, however I find your attitude self delusional and patronising.
If you think this is rude, you should have seen what I have edited out.
R+C
You must be delusional, or a lawyer, or both, in which case I should address you as:
Nick Esq.
!
Now don't get me wrong, I like America, I like Americans, however I find your attitude self delusional and patronising.
If you think this is rude, you should have seen what I have edited out.
R+C
I suspect some angst over our present government and I couldn't agree more. Nevertheless, to indict our legal system because it allows injured parties to sue and prove their case is downright empty-headed. Have you forgotten the Pinto exploding fuel tank cases, the Firestone tires, the roll-over SUV's, the Chevy Corvair, the shatter proof windshields, airbags, seatbelts and on and on. The genesis of most of these improvements were as a result of litigation here in the US.
So please spare us your indignation and go and educate yourself.
BTW, I tried to be as civil as I could given I was called a pig.
05-09-2006, 05:35 PM
#595
Rennlist Member
Another interesting automotive one is the Ford Explorer door latch. On top of separation of the Firestone core, and on top of Ford ultra-low inflation pressures intended to keep the car from cornering at high speeds, it turns out that many injuries were due to an obsolete door lock design.
A revised door lock design had been requested, but lagged behind the anticipated introduction date of the new model (then early 1990's). At the last minute, a door latch design from the early 1970's was substituted. That design unfortunately unlatched itself when upside down. Therefore, when the underinflated firestones, which were manufactured with a flaw, blew out under load, the SUV flipped, and the door lock automatically unlocked, leaving the passenger exposed. None of this would have been learned without the judicial process. Even worse, Firestone might be releasing the same flawed tires.
Jeff is certainly right, in that the track may have exposure, and there may be a bright light cast upon the driver as well, tho if they go for the deep pocket, some may be spared. In the end, if it turns out it was all driver error, then many will feel vindicated by the very process that is reviled. AS
A revised door lock design had been requested, but lagged behind the anticipated introduction date of the new model (then early 1990's). At the last minute, a door latch design from the early 1970's was substituted. That design unfortunately unlatched itself when upside down. Therefore, when the underinflated firestones, which were manufactured with a flaw, blew out under load, the SUV flipped, and the door lock automatically unlocked, leaving the passenger exposed. None of this would have been learned without the judicial process. Even worse, Firestone might be releasing the same flawed tires.
Jeff is certainly right, in that the track may have exposure, and there may be a bright light cast upon the driver as well, tho if they go for the deep pocket, some may be spared. In the end, if it turns out it was all driver error, then many will feel vindicated by the very process that is reviled. AS
05-10-2006, 04:38 AM
#597
Drifting
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Munich
Posts: 2,722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Nick
I could outline a host of changes made in Europe which enhanced the life and welfare of its inhabitants. But what would be the point?
. Have you forgotten the Pinto exploding fuel tank cases, the Firestone tires, the roll-over SUV's, the Chevy Corvair, . The genesis of most of these improvements were as a result of litigation here in the US.
. Have you forgotten the Pinto exploding fuel tank cases, the Firestone tires, the roll-over SUV's, the Chevy Corvair, . The genesis of most of these improvements were as a result of litigation here in the US.
Europe does not look to America for legal changes! Most legal codes in Europe owe more to the Code Napoleon than to anything from the US. English and American legal opinion did contribute to the constitutional restructuring of Germany, but this is an unusual exception.
You obviously are not as familiar with Europe as you imagine yourself to be. look around, we don't have Pintos, shoddy Firestone Tyres, roll-over SUVs, or even Chevy Corvairs, quite the little historian with thast last example Nick, doubtless you are a fine litigator.
Don't go down the demeaning 'some of my best friends are Americans' path either, its a vacuous argument in my case, which won't stop you using it. rather refine your terms.
R+C
05-10-2006, 09:25 AM
#598
Rennlist Member
Nord,
Re German Justice: Isn't this the same legal system that needed two tries to convict an admitted murderer/cannibal? Yes, the one that came with actual video. And wrist-slapped the guy who stabbed Monica Selles in front of an international tv audience? I'm not sure this is much to brag about either. I think much of that "constitutional restructuring" occurred following the untimely demise of my entire family(all but 2). With that history, it's hard to be holier than thou.
For every one we get wrong, we get a fair number right. Who is the German legislator who wants to reintroduce "Heil" as the greeting at public speeches?
AS
Re German Justice: Isn't this the same legal system that needed two tries to convict an admitted murderer/cannibal? Yes, the one that came with actual video. And wrist-slapped the guy who stabbed Monica Selles in front of an international tv audience? I'm not sure this is much to brag about either. I think much of that "constitutional restructuring" occurred following the untimely demise of my entire family(all but 2). With that history, it's hard to be holier than thou.
For every one we get wrong, we get a fair number right. Who is the German legislator who wants to reintroduce "Heil" as the greeting at public speeches?
AS
05-10-2006, 09:46 AM
#599
Burning Brakes
Alex, the cannibal was found guilty even though he had the permission of his victim - it was an interesting precident - but retried as the prosecuter thought the first sentence was not severe enough. He got life without parole now.
More interesting is this from the IRISH INDEPENDENT today:
ANYONE doing business in the United States is sure to get caught up in its legal system eventually, and could find themselves a target for shareholders and other lawsuits in the US courts, the chairman of Lloyd's of London insurance market said in Dublin last night.
"Tort costs are expanding around the world at twice the rate of the global economy. Added to this is the fact that US legal jurisdiction is trying to creep outwards."
He said business leaders must do more to adopt a united front and lobby for change in compensation law as and when necessary.
"It is a burden on the whole economy, which stifles innovation and risk-taking everywhere."
I think this confirms that the rest of the world does not look to the US for advice on how to run a legal system.....sorry Nick.
More interesting is this from the IRISH INDEPENDENT today:
ANYONE doing business in the United States is sure to get caught up in its legal system eventually, and could find themselves a target for shareholders and other lawsuits in the US courts, the chairman of Lloyd's of London insurance market said in Dublin last night.
"Tort costs are expanding around the world at twice the rate of the global economy. Added to this is the fact that US legal jurisdiction is trying to creep outwards."
He said business leaders must do more to adopt a united front and lobby for change in compensation law as and when necessary.
"It is a burden on the whole economy, which stifles innovation and risk-taking everywhere."
I think this confirms that the rest of the world does not look to the US for advice on how to run a legal system.....sorry Nick.
Last edited by Irishdriver; 05-10-2006 at 10:19 AM.
05-10-2006, 11:35 AM
#600
Nordschleife Master
Please don't judge our entire country based on one wingnut lawyer's view. Most reasonable people in the US think the legal system is a big pile of dog poo.