I can’t find it online, but I’m pretty sure I heard a snippet of a phone recording between the stalker and the hotel employee. It didn’t sound to me like he got her room number by trickery at all. He simply asked to be in the room next to Erin Andrews.
Anyone else remember hearing that?
Under “traditional” joint and several liability, yes. Many states have shifted to more strict apportionment so that each party only pays their percentages.
One reasonable way would be for the hotel to use the standard hotel practice Bienville described earlier in the thread, for staff to direct guests to use telephones that do not display the room occupant’s name.
I don’t know how the creep was able to find out her name and room thru the phone system.
Regards,
Shodan
But isn’t that the whole foundation of lawsuits; bestowing the right to a jury to determine the severity of her trauma? I personally wouldn’t have awarded her nearly that much but luckily for her she found a group of people that saw fit to do just that.
Since this case started I’ve heard daily sound bites that essentially said stalker dude asked the hotel for a room next to Ms. Andrews, which made me think “hell yeah, sue the pants of 'em”. Now it sounds like they weren’t quite as culpable as I first thought. I had also wondered what, precisely, he filmed her doing to warrant her hysteria. So, it’s just her standing there, naked? I know I’m in the minority but I don’t think that calls for millions of dollars in damages. Obviously the members of the court heard all the details - perhaps seeing her in person made her pain more palpable - something made them sympathetic to her, but from my viewpoint with the limited knowledge I have, I just don’t see it.
$55 million. Really? - Oh me! Oh my! - Sure does sound like a lot of dough! Don’t it?
I would like to ask you all this one question - Would anyone here be willing to guess:
When all is said and done … after lawyers’ fees and all other expenses … how much of all that dough do you think she will take home?
It was stated in the OP. Did you not read it before posting?
Not disclosing guest rooms is a standard practice for all hotels. Providing privacy is one of the basic functions of a hotel.
You know who goes to hotels? People having affairs. You know what harms business? Jilted spouses banging on the doors and wailing in the hallways (or worseggvg). This is an everyday concern of hotels, and probably the main reason why they grgrgrrrrgc
three fiddy.
The information came from Michael David Barrett’s 2 1/2 hour deposition. I haven’t found a transcript but highlights of it have been reported. The guy and his plan are sickening.
Marriot is a $12.7 billion dollar company. I’m sure they can absorb the cost.
I’m more of a Starwood guy myself, so I’m not really worried.
Your outrage and knowledge of this incident kind of make me wonder if you have a bunch of peephole drills and tiny cameras you are now stuck figuring out how to get rid of
Sorry. Had to fight off a bear there.
Avoiding domestic disputes is one of the main reasons why basic privacy controls are standard practice across hotels. It’s not the only reason, but it’s one that gives hotels a lot of skin in the game. It comes up all the time, and any hotel that doesn’t take it seriously will be quickly out of business.
Not providing those basic controls is so far from standard practice that it implies not only negligence, but complicity.
Since the trial was held here, it was all over our local news daily with longer clips of testimony than you would see on the national news. The clips of Andrew’s testimony were emotionally devastating, and there was also testimony from a psychologist who confirmed that she continues to suffer from minor PTSD as a result of the incident. And, of course, testimony that the video is going to be available on the internet forever. So arguments that she wasn’t really harmed that much are despicable. *You * may be willing to have grainy nude videos of yourself online for a lot less than $55 million, but she was legitimately crushed. And the jury, hearing all the evidence from both sides, determined that it was 49% the hotel’s fault for not protecting her privacy adequately.
I’m sure it didn’t help that during the trial, a waitress at a local restaurant caught the hotel defendant showing his buddies the Andrew’s video right there at the table in the middle of the restaurant. Reportedly he said “If this video is going to cost me $75 million I’m going to show it to everybody!” I don’t think that was presented in the trial, but it was all over the local news so I’d be surprised if the jury didn’t hear about it.
I read the news like everybody else. I was disturbed by what happened to Erin and followed the news closely during the criminal trial. I thought the conviction and prison time was appropriate.
Just because I don’t agree with suing the hotel you make disgusting and vile accusations like this? Really classy.
I would guess the odds are that she won’t get hardly anything. Someone upthread said this would likely be settled out of court. I would guess that is very likely true.
But, I would guess it will be settled for pennies on the dollar and that it would be settled with the primary thought in mind that the lawyers get paid for their time and no one will care about poor Erin.
She will likely walk away with Zip. Pretty much … Zip!
Real life is just nothing like TV. As soon as the lawyers get the notion they will get a decent amount of money, it will be game over. Over and done. Good night Irene.
P.S. Apologies to anyone named Irene.
Just checking back in to observe that no one has yet offered their opinions on what occurred that was worth $55 million. The closest to an explanation has been that Marriott is a big business. I’m not sure what injuries EA incurred, or what practices by the hotel merit punishment to that degree.
I’m not sure I’d see $55 million as appropriate even if someone had died, and if there had been prior knowledge of the potentially dangerous practices. I don’t know - maybe if Marriott knowingly hired a convicted violent offender and gave him/her a passkey… But please persuade me otherwise.
Please note that I am not for a second suggesting EA was not harmed, or that Marriott ought to pay some damages. Simply questioning the size of the award.
Thanks. I still think the part where he drilled out the peephole puts more than 51% of it on him.
Regards,
Shodan
The case is over. She gets her 55 mil unless a judge rules otherwise.
A few people have made this comment, or something similar. And it’s BS. Payment of compensation should be based on a) the degree of negligence and b) the extent of damages. I fail to see how the hotel is negligent to anywhere near the degree indicated by a $55 million award, nor how the embarrassment of the reporter rises to anywhere near this amount, let alone both. The stalker perv is locked up, which is good. But a $55 million award is insane, and holding the hotel 49% responsible is ludicrous.
Yes, she will not end up getting anywhere near that amount. Probably not much at all from the perv, and the hotel owner will probably pay out whatever the insurance coverage is and perhaps a little more. But try to remember that the hotel is owned by someone, and they are likely suffering a tremendous amount of inconvenience, embarrassment and financial loss. I know, business people don’t count for dick on this forum, but I have sympathy for businesses sued and ruined by people clearly trying to cash in. This kind of media coverage and award amount simply encourage other gold diggers to file lawsuits to hit the jackpot.
Yeah, more like 95%, IMHO.
I can’t say I disagree. The hotel has a responsibility for providing security to their guests, and if a crime is committed on the premises they can be found liable for failing to provide security. This principle has been thoroughly explored by the courts and has significant legal precedent.
I also expect that any halfway decent hotel will have insurance for liability costs.