# "I was speeding, hit your kid and killed him. So I'll sue you." **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 15, 2010, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745 "2010-11-15T15:20:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2010, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/21 "2010-11-15T21:09:35Z")
> [@](#): > > So where you are free to feel bad for this child and his parents, and free to hate the criminal, you cannot call this an injustice unless it is also unjust to hold a parent responsible if they allow their children to play with a loaded gun. It is literally the same thing. > > Is it reasonable to allow a child of 14 to ride his bike outside the direct supervision of his parents? That depends on his mental capacity. Did the parents provide a helmet and explain the dangers of riding a bike without one? Will a medical expert conclude that the child would have died even with a helmet? If, at 80 mph, the helmet would not have made any difference, there will be no defense. The question is who is responsible, and how much? 50/50? 80/20? 99/1? 100/0? A jury will decide. No. A child (or anyone) handling a gun improperly can kill themselves without anyone else being involved. On the other hand, riding a bicycle, even without a helmet, is almost never fatal _unless a motor vehicle hits you_. Unless the kid rode his bicycle out into traffic, such that any driver could have hit him, the death is **one hundred percent** the fault of the driver. It might also be pointed out that had the kid survived, the killer driver and his insurance company would likely be on the hook for vastly higher sums. Death is cheap compared to major trauma. ---
**Author:** ![Mince](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecd19e/32.png) [@Mince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mince)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2010, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/22 "2010-11-15T21:17:26Z")
> [@](#): > > Kenney’s parents, Stephen and Joanne, sued Weaving shortly after he was sentenced last year to 10 years in prison, accusing him of negligence and asking more than $15,000 in damages. And then he sues for $15k. Obviously a mock, retaliatory claim which will be dismissed forthright, I’m sure. ---
**Author:** ![muldoonthief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muldoonthief/32/3188_2.png) [@muldoonthief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muldoonthief)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2010, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/23 "2010-11-15T21:21:40Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > I think an anonymous comment on the linked story pretty much nails the whole thing on the head: Does that comment have any citations to any other sources? Because while that’s a perfectly valid interpretation of what may be happening, I’m rather reluctant to decide the story must be wrong because an anonymous commenter said so. Especially when the story includes details such as the judge waiving $500 in filing fees. AFAIK, there are no fees for filing an answer to a suit against you, so where did the $500 figure come from? Did the writer just make it up? ETA: Here’s another [article](http://www.wfmj.com/Global/story.asp?S=13499833) that makes it clearer that this is a countersuit, not just an answer to the parents’ original suit. Including quotes from Weaver’s lawyer (who is apparently not representing him in this suit). ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2010, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/24 "2010-11-15T22:01:36Z")
It doesn’t make it clear that it’s a countersuit. It makes it clear that it’s a counter_claim_. ---
**Author:** ![muldoonthief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muldoonthief/32/3188_2.png) [@muldoonthief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muldoonthief)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2010, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/25 "2010-11-15T22:39:00Z")
What’s the difference? (not snarky - just don’t know). It sounds like he’s trying to get money from the parents - why is that not a suit? ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2010, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/26 "2010-11-15T23:34:07Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > It doesn’t make it clear that it’s a countersuit. It makes it clear that it’s a counter_claim_. Huh? The article uses the word countersuit three times and never mentions the word counterclaim. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2010, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/27 "2010-11-15T23:42:39Z")
> [@Mince](#): > > And then he sues for $15k. Obviously a mock, retaliatory claim which will be dismissed forthright, I’m sure. Just like the hot coffee claim was dismissed against Mickey D’s… ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/28 "2010-11-16T00:09:15Z")
Would a helmet really have made much of a difference in this case? The article claims he struck the boy with his car going 80mph…that’s pretty damn fast. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 5:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/29 "2010-11-16T05:29:49Z")
> [@Simplicio](#): > > Huh? The article uses the word countersuit three times and never mentions the word counterclaim. Yes. The article is wrong. > [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > Would a helmet really have made much of a difference in this case? The article claims he struck the boy with his car going 80mph…that’s pretty damn fast. Depending on the law of the state, there may be a presumption of contributory negligence for failure to wear a helmet. That means the parents would have to prove that a helmet wouldn’t have made any difference (which probably wouldn’t be that hard, but is still a hurdle). ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 5:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/30 "2010-11-16T05:36:24Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > > [@simplicio](#): > > > > Huh? The article uses the word countersuit three times and never mentions the word counterclaim. > > Yes. The article is wrong. Do you have a cite? We have two articles that treat it like its a countersuit, and just an unsourced comment that indicates its a counterclaim. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/31 "2010-11-16T05:42:25Z")
No, the unsourced comment indicates it’s an answer, which is completely different. A countersuit would be a retaliatory claim brought against the plaintiff by a defendant for an unrelated incident. A counterclaim is a retaliatory claim brought against the plaintiff by a defendant for the same incident. Unless he hit the same kid twice, it’s a counterclaim, not a countersuit. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 7:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/32 "2010-11-16T07:00:20Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > Just like the hot coffee claim was dismissed against Mickey D’s… Except the hot coffee claim had merit, and this, on the surface doesn’t. If you fancy a little wager on this, I’ll be willing to bet anything you want this doesn’t see a jury. ---
**Author:** ![muldoonthief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muldoonthief/32/3188_2.png) [@muldoonthief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muldoonthief)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/33 "2010-11-16T14:56:06Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > No, the unsourced comment indicates it’s an answer, which is completely different. > > A countersuit would be a retaliatory claim brought against the plaintiff by a defendant for an unrelated incident. A counterclaim is a retaliatory claim brought against the plaintiff by a defendant for the same incident. Unless he hit the same kid twice, it’s a counterclaim, not a countersuit. Ok, but Weaving’s still trying to sue the parents for $15k, claiming it’s their fault (or at least partially their fault) the kid was killed, not his, correct? Because that seems to be the main point of both articles, and the subject of the pitting. Whether that’s a “countersuit” or “counterclaim” doesn’t change the basic facts of the article, does it? ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/34 "2010-11-16T15:02:44Z")
Oh my god, a guy called Weaving was recklessly driving and killed Kenney? I have a fever and the only cure is more black humor. ---
**Author:** ![gwendee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/35a633/32.png) [@gwendee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gwendee)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/35 "2010-11-16T15:23:50Z")
What, I’d like to know is grounds for the parents’ $15k suit. If his funeral cost them that amount, or they had to pay that for an ambulance and ER after the accident, that makes sense to me. It seems to be fact, not speculation, that the driver was doing 80mph. Would a helmet really have made much difference? That’s fast. Isn’t serving a 10 year sentence how the driver pays for his crime? I understand the difference legally between criminal and civil actions, but is it a way to punish someone twice for the same crime? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/36 "2010-11-16T15:23:52Z")
> [@](#): > > Ok, but Weaving’s still trying to sue the parents for $15k, claiming it’s their fault (or at least partially their fault) the kid was killed, not his, correct? Because that seems to be the main point of both articles, and the subject of the pitting. Whether that’s a “countersuit” or “counterclaim” doesn’t change the basic facts of the article, does it? Well, sort of. If it’s a separate lawsuit, the outcome is independent of whatever happens in the parents’ original suit against him. That means Weaving might win a judgment he can actually collect, but the parents win one they can’t collect (since he has no money, and nothing to garnish). If it’s a counterclaim, the same jury\* will determine the merits of the original claim and Weaving’s claim and reach a monetary judgment accordingly. So they might find in favor of the parents for $15k on the original claim, and in favor of Weaving for $2k, and the judge will almost certainly order that the latter amount simply be deducted from the judgment against him, rather than actually making the parties pay the full amount of each judgment. If Weaving’s lawsuit was separate, the judge couldn’t do that, since it would be tried separately. Winning a lawsuit and collecting on that suit are two very different things. If you sue a large corporation and win, and there’s no appeal, they’ll probably just pay the judgment. However, if you sue Joe Blow and, you’ll probably have to go get a garnishment order to collect, which means months or years of additional litigation. So, if Weaving isn’t insured, it’s by no means a sure thing that the parents actually collect, even if he has the assets to pay. \*assuming it gets to a jury. As noted above, “contributory negligence” is not a claim that can be asserted in a complaint; it’s a defense to a claim of negligence. **villa’s** prediction that Weaving’s claim never makes it to a jury is almost certainly accurate, unless there’s more to it than that. > [@gwendee](#): > > Isn’t serving a 10 year sentence how the driver pays for his crime? I understand the difference legally between criminal and civil actions, but is it a way to punish someone twice for the same crime? The 10 year sentence is how the driver repays society for his crime. The civil judgment is how he would repay the victim (or in this case, the parents) for his negligence. Obviously, it’s another punishment, in a sense, but in legal terms it’s restitution. The parents can only collect up to the amount of their damages. Now, their damages can include pain and suffering, and that’s where the real money is in lawsuits, but from the point of view of the law that’s still restitution. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/37 "2010-11-16T16:17:19Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > Just like the hot coffee claim was dismissed against Mickey D’s… [Allow me to fight your ignorance.](http://www.caoc.com/CA/index.cfm?event=showPage&pg=facts) ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/38 "2010-11-16T16:27:21Z")
Fighting **Clothahump** ’s ignorance is like trying to dry off the ocean with a towel. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/39 "2010-11-16T16:30:04Z")
Which is why I am trying to make some money off of this. Come on **Clothahump** , take the bet. Money where mouth is and all that jazz. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/40 "2010-11-16T16:36:23Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > I think an anonymous comment on the linked story pretty much nails the whole thing on the head: > [@](#): > > … > To refuse this defense would permit anyone to ignore any safety rules. Construction workers wouldn’t need to wear hard hats, people would not have to put locks on their guns, people wouldn’t have to leash their dogs, people could ignore traffic laws. They would always be able to blame someone else, completely irrespective of their own conduct. > > … I’m no lawyer, and I hope someone can correct me if I’m wrong, but I seem to recall a law generally known as the “Eggshell Skull” rule. It states that no matter the vulnerability of the victim, even if his skull was as thin and brittle as an eggshell, the fault is of the person who harm that victim even if he would not have otherwise harmed a person with a normal skull. In other words, it doesn’t matter what the state of victim is, what matters only is that harm was caused to him. It would seem to apply in this case: that guy shouldn’t have hit the kid, whatever happens, it’s his fault, even if she was blindfolded and juggling fiery knives [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745.md?page=3)