Right. It’s galling to read, but I would think it’s par for the course in a case like this.
Right. I was going to make a Pit thread about that, but then I realized Wal-Mart is looking to mitigate the amount of damages they’ll be required to pay. That’s the normal thing. I wouldn’t be surprised if they even settled out of court for an undisclosed amount.
The galling part is where they claim his injuries are ** wholly** or in part were caused by the lack of his seat belt usage.
Wholly? After seeing pictures of the crash I can’t buy wholly.
And is the $400K they would save in that case be worth the bad press they’re getting as a result of it?
Yes.
It isn’t just $400,000. Most companies don’t make a habit of rolling over and submitting to every suit brought against them. That encourages future problems.
Bad press? Morgan just lost some of my sympathy. I still think it’s douchy that Walmart is making truck drivers have to disobey the law in order to make quotas, which is probably what happened, and I also think the driver himself bears some responsibility, because I read in a couple of places that he had some opportunity to sleep and didn’t use it (yes, I get that you have to eat, and shower, and you want to see your family). But I await the accident analysis to hear whether it is or isn’t true that the injured people could have suffered less had they been wearing belts.
Really? When you heard about this originally did you actually picture everybody in the back of that limousine strapped in with shoulder harnesses? That’s just not how you limo.
What? seatbelts aren’t legally required in a limo?
In NY adults are only required to use seat belts in the front seat and seat belt use is not required for passengers in livery vehicles and buses. I’m not sure about NJ, but the idea is not completely crazy.
I’ve been in many a limo, and I’ve never seen anyone wear belts in one. Not opening on whether it is lawful or not, but it’s not, in my experience, common. Never even been asked to wear a belt by the driver.
Yes, I’ve seen the vehicle referred to as a “limo-bus”. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a bus with seat belts. I don’t even think school buses require seat belts.
I think the lesson here is that we should all wear seat belts in limos just in case Wal-Mart sends one of it’s truckers hurtling toward us.
No, the lesson is that we wouldn’t need seat belts if it weren’t for Walmart.
My bad. Indiana requires seatbelts for adults even in the back seat, but I just Googled, and it’s one of only six states that does. So if I get in a taxi, even an extended one with high-backed seats, I wear the belt. But my family is big on seatbelts, so even when I was a kid, everyone always wore them, even in the back, even adults. About the only exception was long trips where someone might lie down in the back seat to take a nap, but even then, people usually did that with a lap belt on loosely, something I have since learned is actually really dangerous, but this was in the 70s; we didn’t know any better.
But if it’s the case that it isn’t the law in the state where the accident happened, then it probably won’t be allowed as a mitigating (if that’s the right word) factor. The limos are probably manufactured with the belts because of the six states which require them, just like cars are all manufactured with emissions control devices that only California requires (or at least, a place to install the device and a fuse and sensor for it*).
*I once had a car that annoyingly kept having a sensor go off telling me to replace an emissions control device it didn’t have, but it had the sensor because of California laws. I disabled it myself.
Wal-Mart in particular has a reputation for being doggedly combative when it comes to litigation- they absolutely will not settle out of court, unless they’re nailed to the wall with no wiggle room.
So basically they’re going to fight like hell to not pay out, as a matter of principle to discourage future suits, while other companies usually assess the legal costs against the settlement and go with whichever’s cheaper, including any goodwill losses, etc…
In some sense, doing it on a high profile case like this is GOOD from their perspective- everyone sees them fight tooth and nail in a highly public case involving a popular entertainer, and hopefully realizes that if you’re some nobody in a lesser case, there’s no way on Earth that they’ll settle with you.
Tracy’s lawyer is now say he suffered a deep brain injury.
http://www.people.com/article/tracy-morgan-recovery-unsure
I recall one early video of Tracy walking out to his SUV. He was using a walker and supported by an aide. He got in the SUV and briefly spoke to reporters. He smiled and flashed the V sign. Same Tracy that we always see. He seemed ok and very much aware of his surroundings. His injured leg seemed like the biggest issue. I thought he’d be performing again in a few months. Apparently not.
I hate to speculate, but could this reported downturn be about the lawsuit and $$,$$$,$$$?
I got a hunch Walmart will be paying tens of millions to Tracy and the other victims. They have to compensate him for future lost earnings. The families of the dead victims will be well compensated and they should be.
Are you diagnosing the extent of his injuries based on seeing a few seconds of TV footage?
Morgan won’t get a settlement from Walmart without a thorough expert report.
His status at that point might not reflect his current status, depending on the injuries to his brain and the treatment that followed. After his stroke, my dad was recovering really, really quickly. Then there was an infection where they performed surgery, and he went back downhill. His recovery from that point was much more difficult, but it all stemmed from the initial injury (in his case, a hemorrhage).
Also, he might be well enough to sort-of walk, and to briefly interact, but performing requires a lot more engagement.
For an extra 10 million would you exaggerate your disabling injuries? Would the majority of people exaggerate for that kind of pay off?
Morgan will be compensated for future lost earnings if this is a permanent disabling injury. That could easily be up in the 10’s of millions that he would have made. He is an established star in the prime of his career. Had a tv development deal. His prospects of future earnings were quite good.
He was badly injured. It’s a tragedy for all the people in that car. He’s only been caught on camera once that I know of since the accident. So we really don’t know how badly he’s disabled.