Grandfather sentenced for death of granddaughter

[LilBlackDress]

5 minutes ago, sparks1093 said:

Even if it is a contingency case I don't think that means that the family can drop the suit without incurring the costs up until now. My wife retained an attorney on contingency once and I am fairly certain there was a clause in the agreement that said as much.

My DH had a contingency case... that dragged on for a few years. After the 2nd or 3rd time back to court, I was concerned and reread the contract. If he lost or was dropped, we owed nothing.
I guess it could depends on the lawyer or the case to have a clause in place. I would think with the mothers career, she wouldn't sign with that type of clause in place... Just my 2 cents, I could be way off tho!! 

[A&L_Ont]

1 hour ago, LilBlackDress said:

I disagree... If they settle, it still gets plastered all over the news and the public will think RC was at fault. They go to court, they have a 50/50 chance that the jury is impartial. The plaintiff doesn't get to stack the jury.

I tend to disagree. If it is settled out of court there will be a confidentiality agreement signed, to which the family can never talk publicly about the event again.

[LilBlackDress]

10 minutes ago, A&L_Ont said:

I tend to disagree. If it is settled out of court there will be a confidentiality agreement signed, to which the family can never talk publicly about the event again.

A confidentiality agreement never crossed my mind. 
But I don't see it quietly disappearing into the night either

[mjkacmom]

1 hour ago, LilBlackDress said:

My DH had a contingency case... that dragged on for a few years. After the 2nd or 3rd time back to court, I was concerned and reread the contract. If he lost or was dropped, we owed nothing.
I guess it could depends on the lawyer or the case to have a clause in place. I would think with the mothers career, she wouldn't sign with that type of clause in place... Just my 2 cents, I could be way off tho!! 

Just because she is savvy with the law doesn’t mean she was smart when she signed the contract during duress. Ambulance chasers know what they are doing and contact “victims” immediately. I’m sure a lot has been spent by the attorney on this case.

[mjkacmom]

1 hour ago, LilBlackDress said:

A confidentiality agreement never crossed my mind. 
But I don't see it quietly disappearing into the night either

But it will, I’m sure the majority of people completely forgot about this case if they heard about it at all. To be honest, I know there were similar horror stories happening at zoos, I have no idea what zoos.

[CraigG]

21 minutes ago, mjkacmom said:

But it will, I’m sure the majority of people completely forgot about this case if they heard about it at all. To be honest, I know there were similar horror stories happening at zoos, I have no idea what zoos.

My thought exactly. This thread was started  because we are interested parties. The rest of the world could not care less.   

[njkruzer]

7 hours ago, GUT2407 said:

One thing that does occur to me, here in Australia a defend and can say, this case is next to hopeless, but if we win the plaintiff has no capacity to meet our costs. If the Court agrees they can order that the proceedings be stayed until such time as the plaintiff shows how they will indeed be able to meet at costs order or pays sufficient money into Court.

 

Is there any such provision in your system.

In the US, in most cases each party pays its own expenses.  There are some situations where the lower can be assessed costs but this isn't one of them. 

[A&L_Ont]

2 hours ago, LilBlackDress said:

A confidentiality agreement never crossed my mind. 
But I don't see it quietly disappearing into the night either

If there is an settlement agreement it will simply disappear, because if the family continues to go public after the settlement they will be sued by RC. It will break the confidentiality portion of their agreement. 
 

Before an agreement/settlement is made or makes it to court the family’s lawyer will start to wrap up the media campaign.  It’s the pressure to make RC look bad that will make them consider settling sooner than later. All part of the dance. Other than here on CC it’s not making traction in the media. 
 

Why would RC want to concur extra legal costs, while being run through the negative media gauntlet and still have to pay out over and above. The individuals hearing the case will still make RC pay out, simply because they are large corporation.  Even if they feel the grandfather was more than responsible.  
 

The simplest thing to do is make a settlement quickly, and leave this in their review mirror. 

[njkruzer]

These lawyers want the publicity.  They want to be able to post a win on their website.   Way past the time for a quick quiet settlement. 

[A&L_Ont]

29 minutes ago, njkruzer said:

These lawyers want the publicity.  They want to be able to post a win on their website.   Way past the time for a quick quiet settlement. 

It is never too late for a settlement.
 

As for the quiet aspect, the family has been vocal about this since day one in regards to stating that Royal Caribbean is 100% responsible.
 

The lawyers can also say they had success on their website, referencing the amount of funds in cases won or settled out of court. It’s about the funds for their clients, but it’s more about the money for them.  They’re here for the money, just like the family.

[S.A.M.J.R.]

10 hours ago, Bloodgem said:

Is it possible that they cannot afford to drop the law suit now? 

I've read somewhere that it's common in civil cases that if the plaintiff drops the case on their own, then they would owe their lawyer for his time & expenses.  However, if they go to trial and lose, they don't owe anything.  

 

It was a conversation on a message board, so I don't know how accurate it is, but if true, I could understand that being the reason they haven't dropped the case. 

[Goodtime Cruizin]

On 2/11/2021 at 7:40 AM, Vagabondvoyager said:

I think this whole incident was a tragic accident.  That poor grandfather did nothing wrong.  It was an accident.  The cruise line did nothing wrong.  It was an accident.  I can't believe charges were brought against that grandfather.  That family had gone through enough misery.

 

Negligence. He was negligent in his decisions and his actions. If he was driving a car and crossed over a double yellow centerline of the highway, he could easily be charged for negligent homicide if a death was involved. 

 

[grapau27]

2 hours ago, florida eagle said:

The truth is, the man murdered the child. The man got off lightly. And the family is going to get paid for it. We get on cruise ships at much more reasonable prices then decades ago. When events happen the cruise industry makes changes within its confines. Getting the government involved for safety measures and other things can double the price of the cruise for 10% improvement. We are humans. We screw up. This man screwed up. Badly. Cruise ships are safe. But there are potential issues if you make it that way. Railings and windows are common sense.

+1

[Roger88]

4 hours ago, njkruzer said:

These lawyers want the publicity.  They want to be able to post a win on their website.   Way past the time for a quick quiet settlement. 

it all sounds quite normal to me. I mean everyone want to have their achievements known to the rest of the audience. Its very important, especially for lawyers. It will bring them even more clients

[sparks1093]

13 hours ago, LilBlackDress said:

My DH had a contingency case... that dragged on for a few years. After the 2nd or 3rd time back to court, I was concerned and reread the contract. If he lost or was dropped, we owed nothing.
I guess it could depends on the lawyer or the case to have a clause in place. I would think with the mothers career, she wouldn't sign with that type of clause in place... Just my 2 cents, I could be way off tho!! 

I'm sure every contract is different. I know that if I was an attorney and representing someone on contingency it would have such a clause because I wouldn't want to be stuck with nothing should the client bail.

[njkruzer]

27 minutes ago, sparks1093 said:

I'm sure every contract is different. I know that if I was an attorney and representing someone on contingency it would have such a clause because I wouldn't want to be stuck with nothing should the client bail.

It is quite standard in contingency cases for the client not to owe anything if they lose. Lawyer usually fronts the money for costs, which are reimbursed if they win.  If client changes attorney there is usually an agreement that original attorney gets reimbursed and part of the fee.

[sparks1093]

10 hours ago, njkruzer said:

It is quite standard in contingency cases for the client not to owe anything if they lose. Lawyer usually fronts the money for costs, which are reimbursed if they win.  If client changes attorney there is usually an agreement that original attorney gets reimbursed and part of the fee.

Yes, if they lose. I am talking about a client dropping the lawsuit. Two different scenarios.

[sean of the seas]

On 2/9/2021 at 1:03 PM, ace2542 said:

Look at the baby in Wisconsin.  Fwiw we have never had a case of fetal abduction in the UK nor a case of kidnap of baby not for years and years not since the mid 90s I don't think. Or hospital security is too tight for that to happen. It cannot happen apparently no. And with the size of the country there would be no point to either crime.

Really

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9342522/pregnant-mum-forgives-womb-raiding-attacker-ellie-wilkins/

[ReneeFLL]

On 2/11/2021 at 9:19 AM, coffeebean said:

Freedom had a renovation of the area and those windows are now gone.

What is there now?

 

On 2/11/2021 at 2:25 PM, livingonthebeach said:

 

Especially since grandpa, despite being only 50 yrs old, was unfit, overweight and had health issues. 

 

What does this have to do with it?

[livingonthebeach]

5 hours ago, ReneeFLL said:What does this have to do with it?

It means he knew he was out of shape and not the picture of health — more reasons for refraining from doing what he did.