Posted on 02/11/2005 11:21:34 AM PST by UpHereEh
As a general rule, suing a seven-year-old won't score you any points with St. Peter. But Mary Ellen Michaels and her lawyer, Judson Hawkins, already have guaranteed reservations at the Burning Lake of Fire Spa & Resort. Our saga began when Michaels was rollerblading down a Metroparks bike path in Strongsville last spring. She came upon a seven-year-old riding a bike. Behind the boy was his grandma, who was watching him while his parents were on a trip to New Orleans.
Michaels yelled at the boy to get out of the way. The kid stopped his bike, giving Michaels barely enough room to pass. She tried to squeeze through, but never made it. The toe of her rollerblade caught the bike's rear wheel. Michaels' leg snapped, and her foot twisted 180 degrees. "This was a serious injury," says Hawkins.
Most people would chalk it up to bad luck. What are you gonna do, sue a seven-year-old?
Well, if you're Mary Ellen Michaels, yes.
And just to secure her future in the Land of 1,000 Screams, she also sued Grandma and the boy's parents, who were a thousand miles away at the time.
The boy's lawyer politely notes that this was a bad move. "Basically, what we said is that even if you accept everything she says as fact, she still doesn't have a case," says Patrick Roche. Translation in non-lawyerspeak: "What the %$#@ is wrong with you, Mary Ellen?"
Both the trial and the appellate courts tossed the case. But that doesn't mean the kid's getting off scot-free. Michaels directed her lawyer to fight all the way to the Ohio Supreme Court. "I don't take frivolous cases," says Hawkins, whose hobbies presumably include stealing old people's medicine and torturing kittens. "I did considerable research before I sued a seven-year-old. Given the nature of the injury, I thought it merited a lawsuit."
As long as this women has money her attorney will continue to press the case. It's a no lose case to him. He gets paid and his name gets spread all over.
"Not if he was in her lane of the path. You have driven a car, right? You can understand the concept..."
I have read the article two and half times and still don't see where it said what side of the path either of them was on.
The woman is retarded for suing a child because of a accident...just face it...speed limit or not...she's retarded.
Uh, no, if you read my earlier posts that's not what I would do. If I saw him swerving I would slow almost to a stop and also yell out "passing left" so that the kid and more importantly the adult could hear. If the kid cuts right in front of me with no warning, then there is an accident. A multi-use path is a risky place for anyone who can't stay in control. It's a public path.
She doesn't fall! The son of a b^^^ch pushed her!
(At least thay's what Kerry would say.
There ain't no "stop" on rollerblades, there is only slide..........!XXX
If I could have resisted then I wouldn't be a true freeper now would I??
Actually, I should have "fixed" the article title to say, "BOY'S BIKE INJURES INNOCENT ROLLERBLADER."
That way, it could be the bike's fault, and Bush's!
Let people sue all they want, but charge them ALL court and attorney costs (for the defendant too) when they lose. Along with stupidity damages.
BTTT
It also seems to me that this woman was "driving too fast for conditions"; it's hardly unreasonable to presume that, on a bike path, you might come upon someone who has fallen off their bike, has just gotten a flat tire, or is otherwise obstructing the path. Going too fast to stop, or trying to squeeze by an obstruction when there was insufficient room to do so would seem to me to be the fault of the rollerblader
"The standing object is not always in the right if the object doesn't have the right-of-way."
Would you sue a 7 year old if you slammed him? Whether or not it was his fault?
Put the bottle down, step away from the computer.
I wonder if the little guy pointed at her crotch and said "shooting blanks".
Shouldn't she have been Roller Blading in a Roller Park? Bike Paths are for Bikes.
As a biker, I HATE rollerbladers, they skate from side to side and generally require 2-3 times the width of a good cyclist on any bike path. They have far less control over their own momentum than a biker does, in fact few bladers know how to brake properly and swiftly.
I agree. The situation is similar to that of downhill skiing, where the higher elevation skiier is responsible for avoiding the lower elevation one.
Just like those evil SUVs that just lose their mind and start running people over and crashing into things without the driver? ;)
mark
By which I presume you mean that this woman couldn't see over the next hill/around the next bend. Fine. But in that case you have to bike, blade, or run slowly enough so that if there is something unexpected on the path as it is revealed, you can stop. If that means that you have to run/blade/bike slower than you wish, you need to go somewhere else; you don't just blade as fast as you want and yell at people to get out of your way when you come upon them unexpectedly. At night, this is known as "outrunning your headlights".
What's she going to take -- his teddy bear? No assets. No contributory negligence on the part of the parents either.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.