Not really affecting me at all other than observing series of poor choices and turn of events that resulted in injuries and will ruin his financial life as well as the innocent parties.

I did not want to "re-try" his case here, rather I thought it would be good discussion material. I think he will try to claim bankruptcy next week, not sure if that will "protect" him

BK will not get rid of this judgement. His financial life is ruined any way you slice it, as it should be. He should thank his lucky stars that he lives in such a civil society. In the olden days, the victims would hire some pipe-swinging MFers to really even the score. What an ass hole.

I agree - when he told me his plans about filing.........I said "ok" ................I did not let on that I thought this would be fruitless

I kind of wonder how BK will work here. It won't wipe away the judgment, but the plaintiff is still never going to collect. Maybe they can get wage garnishments, but that's never gonna cover $700k. Wouldn't he then just move to FL or some other BK-shield state?

If he ever buys another boat, it's theirs. Same with a house or anything else of value. If he has equity in it, it's theirs. He might as well go unabomber and live in a tent. Of course this assumes that his victims aggressively pursue him from now until he dies.

Coast guard rules: running lights and <5 mph at night. No wake.

The guys is toast and it sounds like he deserves it.

I ran my blown gas flatbottom on many lakes, but not at night.

I'm from a state with ~16k lakes and lots of rivers. Drunken stupid fks in speedboats maiming and killing innocent people is practically the official sport during summer months. Nothing quite like drowning because you can't tread water with broken bones and a smashed face. I believe in long prison sentences for drunk reckless boat accidents resulting in serious injury.

Hey Sammy I've seen you mention your boat before...how fast are we talkin' about? They get some of them suckers well over 200 mph in the 1/4 at the local closed coarse boat drags...what a hoot :). A time and place for everything...but not at night like you say.

Technically correct. It is considered an illegal act and could be denied. Generally (depends on the state) a DUI is not a criminal charge but a driving offense. However in this case bodily injury occurred and he may have been charged criminally. So the clause may kick-in.But the bigger issue is the lapse of coverage.

Was there a grace period clause in the policy? Not that it really matters it happened over a year ago. The grace period is generally only a few days past expiration. So unless someone had enough presence of mind following such a tragedy the premium probably didn't get paid.

A bottom feeder scumbag attorney will file bankruptcy on his behalf. The scumbag attorney will take half of his net worth and screw the victim.

Yeah, likely this debt (the judgment) will not be discharged in a bky.

Moving to Florida won't help him. It's too late for that.

He can file an appeal of the judgment, but that appeal likely would not stay enforcement of the judgment, so isn't going to do much good (except cost a lot of money).

Given the nature of his work, he is screwed. Very easy to collect against him. They can take discovery, find out who all his customers are, levy on money owing from those customers, all sorts of things.

His best hope is that they don't hire a very aggressive, competent collection attorney.

Its amazing how quickly things can go bad. Everyone has made terrible mistakes. Be careful folks.

do you think his wife could be financially liable?? She was part of his tool business............

do you mean you would like that to be the law?

usually, a drunk will be dealt with harshly

if you put yourself in a position where no reasonable person could have avoided the damage to you, that is different

Why would the judgment not be wiped out in bankruptcy?

I believe she is liable as his wife. I do not believe divorce would separate her from the judgment either.

Certain debts are not discharged (wiped out) by a bankruptcy.

Judgments based on personal injuries caused while intoxicated driving is specifically one of them, along with claims that are based on willful or malicious acts.

Not sure if intoxicated boating would count for either of those, but probably would.

No, she would not be personally liable just because she is his wife!

A judgment against the husband is not a judgment against the wife.

As far as collecting against property of hers, the judgment creditor can't collect any of her separate property. They might be able to go against community property owned by her and the husband, depending on state law.

I'm not going to get into a dispute with those who say bankruptcy would not clear the judgment because I am not 100% positive and some may know for sure but I always thought the only liens that were not wiped out by bankruptcy and followed you through life were government tax liens. Those never go away until satisfied.

This is the reason corporations are formed and more recently LLC and LLP's. Because the business would file bankruptcy vs. personal bankruptcy. Otherwise most small businesses would just operate as sole proprietors.

Before everyone says it yes I know this occurred personally and not as a business pursuit. (we are assuming) because we don't know the ownership of the boat. If the boat were owned by his business he could bankrupt the company and reform under a new entity. However if the boat is owned personally liability falls to him and yes his wife.

There's lots of obligations that aren't wiped out in a bky.

Student loans aren't.

Nor are debts obtained by fraud. For example, if you defraud a bank into loaning you money (false financials, etc.), and they get a judgment against you, that is not going to be wiped out.

Wilfull and malicious acts. The civil judgment against OJ Simpson is a good example of that. He filed bky, but the Goldmans' civil judgment against him was not discharged and still can be enforced.

Claims based on injuries caused while driving intoxicated is another.

And others as set forth in the Bky Code.

That's not true.

If he was driving the boat, he is going to be liable, not matter who owns the boat.

(If someone else, or a business owns the boat, that person or business could also be liable, along with him).

And, again, his wife is not liable for his actions simply because she is his wife.

But this is all moot (or, in PPOT parlance, "mute"), since apparently the judgment was entered against him personally, and not his wife.