This is unbelievable, Michigan Laws

[stealthn]

Guy takes his Jeep into a dealership for oil change, dealership employee without license and can’t drive a stick, moves the Jeep and kills another dealership mechanic, so the family is suing the owner of the Jeep for $15M


https://driving.ca/auto-news/driver-info/jeep-owner-faces-lawsuit-in-tragic-death-caused-by-his-mechanic?

[dad911]

In a situation that likely could only happen in the hyper-litigious United States of America.......

Interesting how this canadian "news" is so quick to bash usa, but the system does seem to work in this case:

That owner has brought subsequent legal action against the dealership for something called indemnity, which will force the dealership to pay the $15 million if the Hawkins family’s lawsuit is successful.

I would also think insurance for the accident follows the vehicle, and the employee does not have deep pockets.

[stealthn]

Soooo, still crazy (and litigious) ��

[dad911]

Originally Posted by stealthn

Soooo, still crazy (and litigious) ��

Yes. Actually I (we) have been defendant on a few frivolous/bs cases. None rewarded the plaintiff, and it cost us some serious coin to defend. Our system has issue, but my point was sensational news seems to have jumped our common border.

Edit: In this case the deceased family probably deserves some coin, and can't get it from the employee or dealership directly.

[Bob Kontak]

Originally Posted by dad911

Edit: In this case the deceased family probably deserves some coin, and can't get it from the employee or dealership directly.

The family's lawyer knows that the car owner's lawyer know about the indemnity business. The dealership will be liable and they should be - my bet. Not the first time this has happened in Michigan.

It's strange to put value on a life taken by an accident but it would simplify things if it could be quantified.

I remember that crash out of Detroit in the 1980's where only a little girl survived. The insurance companies went to the parents of a gay man that perished in the crash and, IIRC, he had HIV and they argued he was going to die anyways to reduce the settlement.

A little off topic. Sorry.

[Bill Douglas]

I'm sure the family's lawyer will prove the dealership didn't take all reasonable precautions and counter sue for stress, hurt feelings and humiliation.

[stealthn]

What I don’t get is why an employee couldn’t sue the employer especially when they are liable hiring someone without a license? And requesting he drive a car he didn’t know how to? Both of those alone.

New venture: fireworks and metal recycling business in Michigan.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by Bill Douglas

I'm sure the family's lawyer will prove the dealership didn't take all reasonable precautions and counter sue for stress, hurt feelings and humiliation.

If the dealership had someone with no license that couldn't drive a stick move a car, then they didn't.

If someone's gross negligence kills your family member, especially if that person was the primary bread winner, it's hard to argue that you wouldn't be owed something.

At the same time, I don't support frivolous lawsuits. "I spilled hot coffee in my lap! $50 million!" That's BS!

[porsche930dude]

That happend at a popular shop near here. It was the owners daughter driving. I think there was a problem with the car no brakes or something. They ended up closing down I dont know what the settlement was.

[john70t]

Did someone say US corporate tort law needs to be overhauled to pragmatic levels?
(but not to China level)

I think someone did.

The only problem is this creates a large swath in the force.
Some cough {(people)} have recently sued their own {(dummy companies)) to create legal precedence on the books.
Law is now horse racing.
Combined with the right Judge, it becomes the finger pulled out of the dyke. The flood of money begins.

The problem is that the general populous can no longer distinguish normal/not normal and sane/insane anymore.

[stealthn]

Originally Posted by john70t

Did someone say US corporate tort law needs to be overhauled to pragmatic levels?
(but not to China level)



The problem is that the general populous can no longer distinguish normal/not normal and sane/insane anymore.

That’s right, but the rest of us can…

[john70t]

Wrong forum me. Oops. Sorry.
Please continue normalizing the crazy.

[LWJ]

Something like this:

Sole remedy for a workplace death is workers’ comp
The damages will be capped
Employer and employee are both protected from litigation due to workers’ comp sole remedy provision
The deceased person’s family must pursue the Jeep owner as there are no other parties
Jeep owners insurance co surrogates against dealership

Make sense?

[ramonesfreak]

Originally Posted by stealthn

What I don’t get is why an employee couldn’t sue the employer especially when they are liable hiring someone without a license? And requesting he drive a car he didn’t know how to? Both of those alone.

New venture: fireworks and metal recycling business in Michigan.

In NY, this is a workers’ compensation claim and you are precluded by law from suing your employer. The estate could sue any other negligent third-party


I’m sure it is no different in every other state since that’s the purpose of Workers’ Compensation to begin with.

[oldE]

Originally Posted by LWJ

Something like this:

Sole remedy for a workplace death is workers’ comp
The damages will be capped
Employer and employee are both protected from litigation due to workers’ comp sole remedy provision
The deceased person’s family must pursue the Jeep owner as there are no other parties
Jeep owners insurance co surrogates against dealership

Make sense?

If you follow that logic, you must also include Fiat-Chrysler for producing a vehicle with a "known defect" ie: a transmission which may cause the vehicle to operate in an uncontrolled fashion.

Best
Les

[CurtEgerer]

I'm originally from Michigan. I know nothing about the case and didn't read the article. But I do know that MI has 'No-Fault' insurance. Just like it implies, fault in an accident makes no difference - the vehicle owner's insurance pays. This includes anyone who was authorized by the owner to drive the car (obviously, this was implied by leaving the vehicle for service at the dealer - the dealer's employees were authorized to drive the car.) Since the car was being driven when the accident occurred, the vehicle owner's insurance company is responsible.

All that said, the reason for No-Fault insurance is to reduce the number of lawsuits and get the cases resolved quickly for the injured parties. So once the mechanic's family is paid, the various insurance companies duke it out behind the scenes via subrogation (this process rarely includes a trial). In this case, it is likely that the dealership's insurance will eventually be reimbursing the vehicle owner's insurance. The owner of the vehicle is not going to be out a dime.

I'm not a lawyer, but I do enjoy Perry Mason reruns.

[svandamme]

I am subscribed on his channel; has pretty good analysis bout legal stuff
obviously few of it relevant to me in europe but he tells it well

[svandamme]

btw, a mechanic that doesn't understand how a stick shift works.
is not a mechanic worth the name

[LWJ]

Let’s flip this around. Your spouse is the breadwinner. You are a stay at home parent. Your spouse is killed through a negligent act. You are 27 with two small children.

How much do you need? How you going to collect? Stijn is correct. The “mechanic” is a joke and there is certainly negligence.

Just a counter opinion.

[flatbutt]

How is the vehicle owner liable?