Child injured by Britt Reid has permanent brain injuries

[Moo Daeng]

14 hours ago, cookinbrak said:

I do love the over-glorification, though. Read the article.

Starting with the thread title-

"Child injured by Britt Reid has permanent brain injuries"

"Family says girl injured in Britt Reid crash has permanent brain injuries"

"Tom Porto, the attorney speaking on behalf of 5-year-old Ariel Young’s family,-'She likely has permanent brain damage' "

Which is it?

Yes, that's the real problem here. Good grief 

[Actionman0z]

I love alcohol and guns. I use them responsibly. Don’t punish me for his inappropriate use of them. Oh, and handsy Joe can take my guns and alcohol when he smells my hair and takes it from my cold dead hand. 

[PhillyB]

4 minutes ago, Actionman0z said:

I love alcohol and guns. I use them responsibly. Don’t punish me for his inappropriate use of them. Oh, and handsy Joe can take my guns and alcohol when he smells my hair and takes it from my cold dead hand. 

lol you actually typed these words and posted them

[Moo Daeng]

16 minutes ago, Actionman0z said:

I love alcohol and guns. I use them responsibly. Don’t punish me for his inappropriate use of them. Oh, and handsy Joe can take my guns and alcohol when he smells my hair and takes it from my cold dead hand. 

If you want a man to smell your hair there is probably a Q forum to arrange for that somewhere. Pay extra and they might dress up like Antifa for you.

Edited March 3, 2021 by Moo Daeng

[Captroop]

15 minutes ago, Actionman0z said:

I love alcohol and guns. I use them responsibly. Don’t punish me for his inappropriate use of them. Oh, and handsy Joe can take my guns and alcohol when he smells my hair and takes it from my cold dead hand. 

If this was the dialogue from a stereotypical "American Redneck" character in a TV show or movie, I'd think it was lazy, unrealistic and a pointlessly knock-you-over-the-head level of satire. Post-Trump America has literally transcended parody of itself.

[manu4t]

18 hours ago, pantherclaw said:

Can't sue KC. 

Not true at all.  They can sue whomever they want....it may just not be sustainable.  In this case they may very well have a legitimate cause of action.

If KC knew he had an issue with substance abuse and hired him anyway, especially if he was known to do it and drive, it could be negligent hiring.  If he was on his way to work or was called in while drinking, it could be respondeat superior.  It depends on CO law.  But nonetheless, I wouldn't be surprised if the family sues KC as they have deep pockets, and this child will have significant medical needs for a long time due to this accident.

[Actionman0z]

11 minutes ago, Captroop said:

If this was the dialogue from a stereotypical "American Redneck" character in a TV show or movie, I'd think it was lazy, unrealistic and a pointlessly knock-you-over-the-head level of satire. Post-Trump America has literally transcended parody of itself.

It was supposed to be satire.  

[SizzleBuzz]

5 hours ago, Snake said:

Bars can be sued for giving the person alcohol so it's the same thing. Right or wrong it's basically the same thing.

Actually in SC all restaurant who serve have to carry 2 million in insurance for that exact reason because even if you serve 1 drink to a person and they harm someone it's your fault. 

It's unlikely the Chiefs had a bar set up in the endzone of their bubble. 

If he kept a cooler in the bed of his truck and he and a couple others drank 2 beers each on the tailgate in the coaches parking lot at the end of a long day technically he'd be at "the facility" but in no way would the team would be complicit.

The scenario you describe there in SC, I'd be curious to see a real-life  example of that...?

It's going to be very interesting to see how this one plays out...

 

Edited March 3, 2021 by SizzleBuzz

[pantherclaw]

2 hours ago, manu4t said:

Not true at all.  They can sue whomever they want....it may just not be sustainable.  In this case they may very well have a legitimate cause of action.

If KC knew he had an issue with substance abuse and hired him anyway, especially if he was known to do it and drive, it could be negligent hiring.  If he was on his way to work or was called in while drinking, it could be respondeat superior.  It depends on CO law.  But nonetheless, I wouldn't be surprised if the family sues KC as they have deep pockets, and this child will have significant medical needs for a long time due to this accident.

They can sue KC, but won't get anywhere. 

[SmokinwithWilly]

2 hours ago, SizzleBuzz said:

It's unlikely the Chiefs had a bar set up in the endzone of their bubble. 

If he kept a cooler in the bed of his truck and he and a couple others drank 2 beers each on the tailgate in the coaches parking lot at the end of a long day technically he'd be at "the facility" but in no way would the team would be complicit.

The scenario you describe there in SC, I'd be curious to see a real-life  example of that...?

It's going to be very interesting to see how this one plays out...

 

It depends on what they knew and what they allowed. If it was against policy for drinking in the facility for coaches and staff, and they didn’t enforce it there could be an issue. 
 

When I was a bartender part of my job was tracking drinks to tables. I more than once had to cut off customers and call taxis. Had undercover ATF buyers a few times, they told us after watching service and trying to have underage buyers. They made our liability perfectly clear about serving too many and what could happen if someone was served then drove drunk. 

[LegioX]

4 hours ago, manu4t said:

Not true at all.  They can sue whomever they want....it may just not be sustainable.  In this case they may very well have a legitimate cause of action.

If KC knew he had an issue with substance abuse and hired him anyway, especially if he was known to do it and drive, it could be negligent hiring.  If he was on his way to work or was called in while drinking, it could be respondeat superior.  It depends on CO law.  But nonetheless, I wouldn't be surprised if the family sues KC as they have deep pockets, and this child will have significant medical needs for a long time due to this accident.

Knowing someone has issues with substance abuse and hiring them is one thing. Be liable for someone else’s screw up that is in no correlation to their company or franchise is another. They have no chance in hell on getting any money from suing KC organization.

1. they did not tell him to wreck

2. they did not knowingly supply him with impairing substance that could contribute to the wreck.

3. They are not responsible for his actions that are completely outside their franchise.

case closed 

[SizzleBuzz]

4 hours ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

It depends on what they knew and what they allowed. If it was against policy for drinking in the facility for coaches and staff, and they didn’t enforce it there could be an issue. 
 

When I was a bartender part of my job was tracking drinks to tables. I more than once had to cut off customers and call taxis. Had undercover ATF buyers a few times, they told us after watching service and trying to have underage buyers. They made our liability perfectly clear about serving too many and what could happen if someone was served then drove drunk. 

If...

[SmokinwithWilly]

2 minutes ago, SizzleBuzz said:

If...

I'm not saying there is or isn't a policy in place. But you can't just look at the franchise and say they have no responsibility without knowing what rules are in place. Too often though, from my experience, will just add people to a lawsuit and let the judge sort it out. Merit of a case has little to do with someone working for a cut of the settlement.

[Move the Panthers to Raleigh]

On 3/2/2021 at 4:36 PM, manu4t said:

Which in many states means a second DUI becomes a felony.

Not in NC