Real Bad Situation With One of My Tool Vendors
 

This guy who I know on a professional and personal basis just received a devistating blow, last week........................to the tune of a $700K judgement against him in a personal injury lawsuit.

Two years ago he was out on Lake Anna partying, boating and yes....... drinking. His wife and two grown sons are with him. After a day of indulging, they get a bite to eat and get back in their go-fast boat to head home (they live on the lake)

It is about dusk/almost dark. They idle out just past the no wake zone and he hammers it. Just anbout time the boat is on plane he sees another boat parked in the middle of the channel, no lights on, fishing. He cannot steer clear in time and t-bones - runs over the other boat w/4 people on board.

Pretty bad scene, all survived but his wife in bad shape as well as a woman in the other boat. Some are air lifted out. He is charged.

Fast forward a few months later, all ok but other woman is sueing for 1 Mil. He gets the official paperwork in the mail. He calls his insurance carrier to see where he stands. Turns out his wife did not pay the premium and the coverage lapsed 5 days prior to the accident................................

I have no sympathy whatsoever. I hope pays up and takes responsibility for his actions.

Not paying insurance premium BEFORE it lapses is making yourself self insured. Painful lesson for your friend. Very painful experience for the folks he crached into.

How much did he have to drink? BAC? Was he charged for operating under the influence?

Boat or car, not really a difference in terms of cause and effect now is it?

Cause , drinking, poor judgement, excessive speed
Effect , human tragedy and miserie

Cause 2 , liable but not insured
Effect 2 , destitute

I thought it was common for insurance providers to exclude claims on accidents as a result of DUI anyway?

Do not know further details, but I'm pretty sure he was under the influence. More to the story.........his wife bails on him about 6 months ago ..........took up w/ technician on their route, he's a Matco tool guy

I'd like to hear more about this. Is there a speed limit once out of the no-wake zone? Don't you have to run lights at night? Are you allowed to park and fish in the channel? Seemed the other boat could have avoided this one too. IIRC, VA has a contributory negligence law that says you're on your own if you're more than 1% responsible for an accident.

I remember this story from one of the performance boat forums I frequent.
Hoinestly, It does not matter who was physically in the wrong. The fact is, if he was impaired, all else goes out the door.

Wow, just... wow. DWI is terribly irresponsible. :(

Perhaps in a civil trial, yes. My wife got hit in MD by a car turning left out of turn and it totalled her car. Other driver was cited by the cops, but his insurance co. told my wife to pound sand because she could and should have been able to avoid it. She didn't have collision the beater and so she lost the car and the other guy got a minor fine. DC, MD and VA have that weird law that is "supposed" to cut down on lawsuits by making everyone's insurance pay for their own insured if they are more than 1% responsible. If you hit a jaywalker with your car, in theory, he's on his own.

Rick - don't think there is any speed limit there. Because of lax regulations and enforcement Lake Anna for years has been a haven for hot boats. You dont' even need mufflers. You could take take a blown fuel hydro down there and as long as the registration was current, life vests and fire extinguishers.....................and you weren't acting like an *ss - the law would pretty much leave you alone.

I had a boat down there for a few years back in the 90's - very laid back if you behave.

Is this the story?

Weekend boat collision on Lake Anna injures 4
By:
Published: August 05, 2009

SPOTSYLVANIA -- Authorities are investigating a late-night weekend boat collision on Lake Anna that seriously injured four people.

Department of Game and Inland Fisheries officer Leonhardt Anderson would not identify those involved in the crash after 11 p.m. Saturday near Brumleys Point in Spotsylvania County.

Anderson said one boat carrying two men hit another boat with two men and a woman on board pulling a fourth person on a wake board. He said one woman remained in the hospital with severe head trauma.

Anderson said alcohol was a factor, but no charges have been filed. The investigation could take two weeks to complete.

There is no speed limit on Lake Anna. Jet skis and wake boarders are not supposed to be on the lake after dusk.

Also agreed about supposed no clearance lights on other boat, bow or stern. - but since he was drinking and had a speed boat the prosecution roasted him on the stand. Seemed everyone forgot about the contributing negligence at that point acccording to him.......

Yes - I believe that is the accident - but there was a woman on the other boat - other than that sounds like it is the one

The judgement is in. Why re-try this on PPOT? I guess the guy deals with it. End of story.



It's not even news.

Trying to feel bad for the guy.....but....

Oh, I don't feel sorry for him at all. I think he should have been hammered with the harshest DUI/BUI rap and penalties available. But the injured parties should not be able to collect anything in a civil suit. They put themselves in the position that led to their injuries. If I were riding my bicycle against traffic at night with dark clothes and no reflectors on, the drunk who eventually hit me should get a DUI, but I shouldn't be able to sue him.

I've got a bass boat that will do mid-70s (and that's FAST on H2O imo), so even if your buddy hadn't been drinking, putting the hammer down with limited visibility is downright stupid and foolish (even moreso after drinking)...and there's a saying about a fool and his money. No sympathy whatsoever for your "friend" gambler, but I do have a lot of sympathy if it's affecting you. Be well...

+1.

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.