New definition for "chutzpah"

Message

gsabc · #1 Post by **gsabc** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 1:50 pm

Or the corresponding Spanish term.

http://www6.comcast.net/news/articles/g ... ners.Sued/

andrewjackson · #2 Post by **andrewjackson** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:13 pm

It does say the court found both parties at fault in the accident.

Still seems like a bad idea to sue the family.

silvercamaro · #3 Post by **silvercamaro** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:25 pm

If the guy is going to sue anybody, it should be his own insurance company. Now, if he has only liability insurance on his "luxury car," and no collision insurance, then he deserves nothing from anybody. There's no way on earth he deserves the bulk of what his insurance company paid the family. (I said "deserves." Who knows what the courts will decide?)

ghostjmf · #4 Post by **ghostjmf** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 4:19 pm

In American cases where both parties are at fault for the accident, I don't think the one with the more expensive vehicle gets to sue the other. Well, they could try, but I doubt they'd win. But I guess I should check.

Also, in my personal opinion, driving 100 in a 55mph zone would make the car driver more at fault than the "bad biking" (& now dead) biker.

A biker in the best of circumstances can make sure they wear reflective clothing & even have lights, but there's no way their lights are going to be as powerful as a car's. They should also do their level best to stay out of the way of cars, the same way drivers of small cars (I am one) try to stay out of the way of larger cars & of trucks.