Discussion
  • Read More
    dothedewJay Hathaway
    10/15/15 10:41am

    Ok, but the testimony still stands on its own. She was suing for insurance coverage of the pain and suffering she still has, which manifests itself in the ability to...hold a plate at a cocktail party? I hope that’s not the only evidence of damages that she has. So fine, she is not the “Auntie-Christ” but she was still a pig (not unlike many other people) for suing for pain that she apparently does not suffer.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      GeorgeGeoffersonLivesdothedew
      10/15/15 10:44am

      That was my take-away from this even after this explanation. Whose name she was required to put on the suit is a sideshow.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      ma--vie--en--rosedothedew
      10/15/15 10:45am

      No, she’s probably suing for a surgery she needed. Our legal and medical system are so incredibly fucked that people need to make bombastic claims to get needed medical care. It’s crazy.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    MiniatureamericanflagsforothersJay Hathaway
    10/15/15 10:32am

    I am a prophet!

    http://gawker.com/relevant-point…

    . . . or I sat through the child liability section of a torts class where the professor assured us that the ten cases of grandparents suing their grandchildren were insurance based and not monster people.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      BrianGriffinMiniatureamericanflagsforothers
      10/15/15 10:40am

      I HATE that everyone thinks they just because a lawsuit is brought to court, that means there's some type of bad blood or strife between the litigants. Most lawsuits are based on one party just trying to recoup costs.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Horsies!Miniatureamericanflagsforothers
      10/15/15 10:43am

      I will continue posting this as long as people continue to believe that the existence of insurance somehow makes a lawsuit less frivolous.

      The coverage she’s seeking to recover under in the homeowner’s policy is third-party liability insurance. Liability insurance isn’t a no fault recovery that pays just because there’s an accident and someone is injured; the insurer agrees to defend the insured, and indemnify the insured IF the insured is liable. It stands in the homeowners shoes, so to speak, and you have to believe that the homeowner is liable for her injury. Liability coverage in a homeowner’s policy is mostly designed to protect the homeowner from losing their house in event of an adverse verdict, not turn the homeowner into a host that’s strictly liable every time some jmoke keels over on their lawn. Many of these injuries should be covered by healthcare, if we had a healthcare system that actually functioned. Look at verdict sizes in countries that have institutionalized and accepted universal healthcare as part of a functioning society.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    besmotheredJay Hathaway
    10/15/15 10:36am

    I loved conservatives’ insistence that this woman was some UES latte liberal from hell abusing the legal system and her nephew to get paid. The truth is, if she were a Republican she’d have started a GoFundMe page for these bills last week. And made $5 million.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Flazlobesmothered
      10/15/15 10:42am

      ...if her nephew was gay, and she broke her foot kicking him, she’d have a meet-and-greet with Huckabee.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      GangstaSpectreOfDefeatbesmothered
      10/15/15 10:45am

      That’s really hilarious because every time I’m in the South for business (Texas and Florida mainly) every local TV commercial is a ad for a personal injury attorney. I’ve lived in blue states all my life and have never seen the sheer number of people trying to get you to sue because you stubbed your tie at Walmart.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    IanJay Hathaway
    10/15/15 10:35am

    Man, Gawker has some smart posters. I saw this reasoning in a few instances when this story popped up. Kudos to those who posited it.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      SweetChelseaIan
      10/15/15 10:40am

      Thanks.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      KinglyCitrusIan
      10/15/15 10:41am

      But, like... almost all of the comments were violently excoriating her without a second thought...

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    PairOfBearClawsJay Hathaway
    10/15/15 10:34am

    I went on vacation with my parents in Alaska years ago, and we got into a car accident. In order to get my dad’s car insurance to pay for our medical bills my mother and I had to sue him. His insurance company ended up settling well before we ever went to trial. My lawyer told me this is something that happens fairly regularly.

    So I can see how this could be a similar circumstance, but somehow the suit went all the way to trial.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      mrblergPairOfBearClaws
      10/15/15 10:52am

      If this happens fairly regularly, maybe someone should change the policies or laws?

      I’m just a simple caveman, confused by this complicated world. But yea, just a thought.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      todovamuymuybienPairOfBearClaws
      10/15/15 10:57am

      It is. My grandmother fell down my parents’ stairs many years ago, broke her hip, and had to sue them. I remember being horrified (I was a moody teen) and they had to calmly inform me that no, it’s a formality, and we don’t hate grandma and vice-versa now.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Sara-Slaughter607Jay Hathaway
    10/15/15 10:40am

    So... remind me again WHY an insurance company, whose purpose is to insure a homeowner against this very type of scenario, cannot be named when someone is trying to recover a loss?

    And, I’m not understanding why she cannot go after Traveler’s directly.

    Help. Does not compute.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Cultural VacuumSara-Slaughter607
      10/15/15 10:43am

      Connecticut state law, apparently, to prevent “unfair” judgements predicated on the fact that big companies have deep pockets. The fact that so many insurance companies are headquartered in Hartford is a complete coincidence, I’m sure.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      PredatrixSara-Slaughter607
      10/15/15 10:45am

      I’m guessing it’s so a juror who’s had a bad experience w/ Traveler’s doesn’t rule in favor of the Aunt just to stick it to them.

      BTW— “stick it to them” is the legal term.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    FrancisJay Hathaway
    10/15/15 10:35am

    The poor woman couldn’t hold her hor d’oeuvres plate. I really feel for her. I can’t imagine what she has been through.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      aka CSaughmyeyeFrancis
      10/15/15 10:50am

      seriously, whose idea was that?

      I was hoping for a settlement in which the kid, in lieu of payment, holds her hors d’oeuvres plate at all family functions. Then, when he turns 21, he can hold her drink.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      lawtalkingguyFrancis
      10/15/15 10:54am

      First off, taken out of context to make her sound out of touch and rich. But take it at face value: if your wrist can’t hold a plate of snacks, your wrist is majorly messed up.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Flm3454Jay Hathaway
    10/15/15 11:29am

    If this is really how the law in that state works then it doesn’t make sense to me. So instead of the insurance companies suing each other to find who’s at fault (so, for example, if I was in an accident and filed a claim with my insurance, my insurance doesn’t want to pay the claim if they can show that the other driver was responsible, therefore it is in their benefit to find the other party responsible), they’re having the clients do it themselves? And wouldn’t the woman sue the insurance company and not the kid? Or why wasn’t the father, or legal guardian, sued instead of the kid? I mean, there’s no way a jury would find a 12 year old kid responsible for negligence for something like this, but MAYBE they’d find the dad negligent, and even then...

    Also (and sorry this is such a rambling rant) if there weren't any hard feelings, why couldn't the parties find an amicable solution together without involving insurance? I've had my car hit by my boyfriend's roommate and we did everything without insurance, as to not raise her policy rate. She paid for all the damage she caused, and it was fine. And she's not even family!

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Space MothFlm3454
      10/15/15 12:13pm

      Well, yes - if you file an insurance claim, you will be asked to show how / why it falls under your coverage. If it does not, then why would your insurance company put the time, money, and resources into filing suit against someone else to pay your bills?

      As far as suing the homeowner’s insurance company; the insurance company didn’t do anything to this woman that she could sue for. Neither did the father (nor did he act negligently). She had to sue the party whose actions might be found liable. The case was simply a case of determining whether or not the party who injured her (the kid) was legally liable (to determine whether or not the homeowner’s insurance company would have to pay for it). The kid was not found liable.

      “why couldn’t the parties find an amicable solution together without involving insurance?”

      So you think that the kid’s father would prefer to pay for her two (possibly three - or more) surgeries, follow-up visits, medication, physical therapy, and potential loss of income out of pocket rather than have his insurance cover it?

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      BmoreMollyFlm3454
      10/15/15 12:16pm

      Laws vary from state to state. Others have posted that Connecticut is especially friendly to insurance companies because there are a lot of insurance companies based in the state.

      As for an amicable agreement - she’s had two surgeries and probably needs a third. That’s a huge expense for anyone to pay out of pocket.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    LindaJay Hathaway
    10/15/15 10:52am

    Don’t yell at me, but why didn’t her health insurance (if she had a policy) pay for the hospital bills? If you go to the emergency room does the hospital ask you what happened? It wasn’t a gunshot wound.

    I went to the ER with pain from a kidney stone a few years ago, they didn’t ask me “have you been eating too much cheese and not drinking enough water?”

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      JillKelleysTitsLinda
      10/15/15 11:24am

      If I go to the ER with an injury, the hospital bills my insurance. But before my insurance will pay up, they send me a form to fill out asking me how I was injured and a list of questions to determine if they can go after someone else to pay the bill. A kidney stone is handled differently from an injury.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      LindaJillKelleysTits
      10/15/15 11:29am

      Thanks!! I’ve (luckily knock on wood) never had an injury that required ER visit.

      So the aunt gets nothing then, right? Since the jury found in favor of the nephew?

      I’m going on no sleep and my reading comprehension is failing today.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Jujymonkey3Jay Hathaway
    10/15/15 10:53am

    It does say something about the utterly corrupt state of affairs of insurance companies that they are entitled to not do what they’re supposed to when someone gets hurt, yet they’ll cancel your policy in a second if you miss a payment.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      J. Walter WeathermanJujymonkey3
      10/15/15 12:26pm

      entitled to not do what they’re supposed to when someone gets hurt

      But this insurance company didn’t “not do what they’re supposed to.” There is no such thing as a homeowner’s insurance policy that says “no matter how someone gets injured in your house, we will pay for it.” What it does say is “if you (the homeowner) are found to be legally liable for an injury to someone, then we (the insurance company) will pay the damages for you.” So, if the 8 year old and his family were found to not be negligent, and thus not legally liable for the aunt’s injury, this does not fall within the homeowner’s insurance coverage.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Jujymonkey3J. Walter Weatherman
      10/15/15 1:02pm

      Have you ever dealt with an insurance company in an effort to collect. They will do whatever they can to avoid payment.

      Reply
      <