# "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:** 3
**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, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/41 "2010-11-16T16:50:15Z")
Having a brittle skull is not a condition within the control of an injured person. Wearing a helmet is. That’s why not wearing a helmet is an affirmative defense here. ---
**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, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/42 "2010-11-16T17:06:21Z")
And, you’ll note, the point isn’t that the kid necessarily \*\*had \*\*any culpability for the accident: “The question is who is responsible, and how much? 50/50? 80/20? 99/1? 100/0? A jury will decide.” Because that’s how the justice system works in this country. ---
**Author:** ![Caffeine.addict](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f475e1/32.png) [@Caffeine.addict](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Caffeine.addict)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/43 "2010-11-16T17:22:12Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > And, you’ll note, the point isn’t that the kid necessarily \*\*had \*\*any culpability for the accident: “The question is who is responsible, and how much? 50/50? 80/20? 99/1? 100/0? A jury will decide.” Because that’s how the justice system works in this country. Not everywhere. What you are talking about is [comparative negligence](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_negligence). While this is rule for most of the country, there are still a few states that haven’t adopted it. Under the states that use [contributory negligence](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contributory_negligence), as long as the Defendant can show that the plaintiff was even 1% at fault, the plaintiff will be barred from recovering. However, I don’t believe that Connecticut is one of those states. ---
**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, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/44 "2010-11-16T17:29:58Z")
It’s not. ---
**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, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/45 "2010-11-16T17:49:35Z")
> [@Caffeine.addict](#): > > Not everywhere. What you are talking about is [comparative negligence](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_negligence). Sorry, ambiguous phrasing on my part. When I said “this is how it works,” I meant it much more broadly, in the general sense of “people are allowed to bring suits, responses to suits, counterclaims, etc., and then it’s decided whether or not the claims have any merit, so stop getting your fucking panties in a wad because somebody is making a claim you find ridiculous.” I wasn’t attempting to comment on the particular kind of suit, which I know SFA about. ---
**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, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/46 "2010-11-16T18:03:31Z")
Well, that’s fair enough, but I think you’ll find most people would rather it didn’t get that far. Jury trials are expensive affairs even if you win, and the time the parents’ attorney(s) will spend getting the counterclaim dismissed will cost them. ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/47 "2010-11-16T18:05:44Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > 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 I don’t think that’s the legal end of the story. We had a story here a couple of weeks ago where two teenaged sisters got drunk and walked home down the middle of a very busy street, and one ended up getting killed by a car. I don’t see where you can completely blame the car driver for hitting a drunk person walking down the middle of a road. There were extenuating circumstances in that the streetlights for this stretch of road were out, but it wasn’t so dark that they couldn’t tell when they were off the road or in the middle of it. Extrapolating from this story to the one in this thread, if the kid was injured in such a way that a helmet would have kept him alive, can you completely blame the driver, or does the kid get some blame for not protecting himself while engaging in a dangerous activity? ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2010, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/48 "2010-11-17T15:22:23Z")
Want to negotiate the terms for the bet, **Clothahump**? ---
**Author:** ![Campion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@Campion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Campion)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2010, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/49 "2010-11-17T17:53:07Z")
> [@villa](#): > > That’s the part of it that was most confusing to me. If they were suing, I’d assume they’d go for a lot more than $15,000 in a death by a drunk driver case, whether he could pay it or not. The article says that they parents are suing for “at least” $15,000 in damages. That sounds jurisdictional to me. For the non-lawyers, different courts hear different cases, depending on the amount at issue. In California, we have small claims, limited civil, and unlimited civil. The procedural rules are different in each, and basically are intended to streamline the process if there’s less at issue. So in small claims, for example, you can sue for up to $7500 (or something like that), but you can’t have a lawyer, and you can’t do discovery. In unlimited civil, you can seek more than $25,000, and discovery is wide open. In limited civil, you’re seeking an amount greater than that available in small claims, but less than that available in unlimited civil, and the discovery procedures that exist are greater than those available in small claims but fewer than those available in unlimited civil. So the “at least $15,000 in damages” sounds like a jurisdictional thing, that the parents are simply asserting their right to be in the court that they’re in. > [@muldoonthief](#): > > 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). A couple of points, although I know absolutely nothing about Connecticut pleading procedures. First, in California at least, you do have to pay to file an answer to a lawsuit filed against you, and it wouldn’t surprise me that a state like Connecticut would also require a fee. $500 seems way high to me, but that could be the fee to file an answer and a counterclaim (or as we would call it, a cross complaint). Second, without knowing anything about Connecticut, it may be that one can file a counterclaim in the same document as the answer, thus engendering the confusion. But I agree with **villa** ; prisoners are bored, if they have an active case pending they get time in the law library, and the prisoners I have known basically sue everyone they come into contact with. The California Attorney General’s office, responsible for responding to prisoner lawsuits, assigns an ungodly number of lawyers to deal with all that muck. So leaving aside the questionable legal merits of the claim, there’s the more practical reason that the guy has nothing better to do with his time. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2010, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/50 "2010-11-17T17:55:30Z")
> [@Campion](#): > > The article says that they parents are suing for “at least” $15,000 in damages. That sounds jurisdictional to me. That makes sense. Good catch. Not practicing in state courts makes me forget that stuff. ---
**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 17, 2010, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/51 "2010-11-17T18:09:38Z")
> [@Campion](#): > > The article says that they parents are suing for “at least” $15,000 in damages. That sounds jurisdictional to me. > > For the non-lawyers, different courts hear different cases, depending on the amount at issue. In California, we have small claims, limited civil, and unlimited civil. The procedural rules are different in each, and basically are intended to streamline the process if there’s less at issue. So in small claims, for example, you can sue for up to $7500 (or something like that), but you can’t have a lawyer, and you can’t do discovery. In unlimited civil, you can seek more than $25,000, and discovery is wide open. In limited civil, you’re seeking an amount greater than that available in small claims, but less than that available in unlimited civil, and the discovery procedures that exist are greater than those available in small claims but fewer than those available in unlimited civil. > > So the “at least $15,000 in damages” sounds like a jurisdictional thing, that the parents are simply asserting their right to be in the court that they’re in. > > A couple of points, although I know absolutely nothing about Connecticut pleading procedures. First, in California at least, you do have to pay to file an answer to a lawsuit filed against you, and it wouldn’t surprise me that a state like Connecticut would also require a fee. $500 seems way high to me, but that could be the fee to file an answer and a counterclaim (or as we would call it, a cross complaint). I think California is, if not alone, then certainly rare in that regard. I’m pretty sure most states’ civil claims are simply split into “small” and “everything else”. A cross-complaint, at least in the Federal rules and Florida, would be a claim by a defendant against another _defendant_, so I guess that’s another difference. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2010, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/52 "2010-11-17T18:14:55Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I think California is, if not alone, then certainly rare in that regard. I’m pretty sure most states’ civil claims are simply split into “small” and “everything else”. > > A cross-complaint, at least in the Federal rules and Florida, would be a claim by a defendant against another _defendant_, so I guess that’s another difference. In Virginia you must bring a claim in a particular court depending on the level of claim - and it isn’t just small claims court and the rest. ---
**Author:** ![Campion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@Campion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Campion)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2010, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/53 "2010-11-17T18:25:00Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I think California is, if not alone, then certainly rare in that regard. I’m pretty sure most states’ civil claims are simply split into “small” and “everything else”. > > A cross-complaint, at least in the Federal rules and Florida, would be a claim by a defendant against another _defendant_, so I guess that’s another difference. Well, California is in many ways very unlike other states. The law here is mainly statutory, the procedure is a bit funky sometimes, and we’ve got lots of courts. I understand that the Los Angeles County Superior Court is the largest court in the US, and the LA District Attorney is the largest local prosecutorial agency in the US. So there are some procedures developed in California that I think are intended to address the immense size of LA. But we like it. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2010, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/54 "2010-11-18T00:57:41Z")
While I think Weaving is probably a wanker and full of shit, its not hard to imagine circumstances that would mitigate his guilt. It does seem undisputed that he was doing 80, that (to me anyway) has different implications if the limit on the road in question was 35 as opposed (for the sake of argument) to 70 or 75. Where was the kid riding the bike? Hard shoulder, extreme right lane, third lane. What sort of road was it? A freeway is different to a residential street. Now the fact that he got 10 years tells me that what he did was pretty egregarious, but as a general principle, it doesn’t seem “wrong” to hold somebody to a reasonable level of care for their own safety - even if someone else is doing something illegal. ---
**Author:** ![Nametag](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nametag/32/406_2.png) [@Nametag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nametag)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2010, 6:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/55 "2010-11-19T06:49:05Z")
State Route 69 in Prospect, CT, is two-lane rural blacktop with a hard shoulder and a speed limit of 45 MPH. There are many homes with driveways opening directly onto it. Connecticut has no limited division in their superior court; there does not appear to be any fee for an answer to a complaint, but there is a fee for initiation of complex litigation, which might arise from a counterclaim (lawyers?), and there are fees for some motions. Weaving’s suit is not yet on the CT court website, but the Kenneys’ suit is, and a sad chronicle it is – sad both in terms of the reporting practices, and in terms of the case. The Kenneys sued Weaving and the commissioner of the local motor vehicle department in March of 2009; the suit against the commissioner has been dismissed, there are interrogatories, discoveries, motions, and objections flying back and forth, and at some point, Weaving filed for a protective order (?!) – somewhere in the midst of this, his lawyer withdrew or was fired, and Weaving, on his own, sued the prison warden and a neighbor of the Kenneys (for what, I don’t know). ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2010, 7:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/56 "2010-11-19T07:56:21Z")
> [@Nametag](#): > > State Route 69 in Prospect, CT, is two-lane rural blacktop with a hard shoulder and a speed limit of 45 MPH. There are many homes with driveways opening directly onto it. > > Connecticut has no limited division in their superior court; there does not appear to be any fee for an answer to a complaint, but there is a fee for initiation of complex litigation, which might arise from a counterclaim (lawyers?), and there are fees for some motions. > > Weaving’s suit is not yet on the CT court website, but the Kenneys’ suit is, and a sad chronicle it is – sad both in terms of the reporting practices, and in terms of the case. The Kenneys sued Weaving and the commissioner of the local motor vehicle department in March of 2009; the suit against the commissioner has been dismissed, there are interrogatories, discoveries, motions, and objections flying back and forth, and at some point, Weaving filed for a protective order (?!) – somewhere in the midst of this, his lawyer withdrew or was fired, and Weaving, on his own, sued the prison warden and a neighbor of the Kenneys (for what, I don’t know). Does a protective order mean what I think it means–something to keep the family from coming near him? If the guy needs one of those in jail–that makes me think the guy may really be a victim of some sort. ---
**Author:** ![Nametag](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nametag/32/406_2.png) [@Nametag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nametag)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2010, 8:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/57 "2010-11-19T08:59:55Z")
No, that’s usually called a restraining order, though not always; a protective order, in litigation, “prevents the disclosure of sensitive information except to certain individuals under certain conditions.” Weaving is probably trying to quash discovery motions or interrogatories; whether to protect his privacy or just waste time is uncertain. ---
**Author:** ![fuzzypickles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/9d8465/32.png) [@fuzzypickles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fuzzypickles)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2010, 9:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/58 "2010-11-19T09:11:10Z")
Stories like this are the reason I favor the death penalty for everything. ---
**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 19, 2010, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/59 "2010-11-19T14:27:29Z")
> [@bengangmo](#): > > …what he did was pretty egregarious… This isn’t a word. But it damn well ought to be. ---
**Author:** ![Caffeine.addict](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f475e1/32.png) [@Caffeine.addict](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Caffeine.addict)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2010, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745/60 "2010-11-19T14:33:15Z")
> [@Nametag](#): > > No, that’s usually called a restraining order, though not always; a protective order, in litigation, “prevents the disclosure of sensitive information except to certain individuals under certain conditions.” > > Weaving is probably trying to quash discovery motions or interrogatories; whether to protect his privacy or just waste time is uncertain. I think that you are right. I’ve seen the term used in trying to cut off certain types of discovery in litigation. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-was-speeding-hit-your-kid-and-killed-him-so-ill-sue-you/560745.md?page=4)