bearrock Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 Originally posted by footballhenry well it happened on an older mans property, it was a church function of sorts. its homeowners insurance that were speaking of, covers liability. Travis' parents insurance cover him (hes on the policy) so therfore they have hired a lawyer for this case, and they want me to do the same obviously to open up the pot. Of course that has the potential to seriously damage my mom which I cannot do to her. But as for the insurance, it is Home-owners policies that were discussing here... Travis's homeowners insurance policy covers him for negligent act committed on other property? Or do you mean that this happened at your residential neighborhood? (I understand this is not really germane to the discussion, just curious) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footballhenry Posted June 2, 2005 Author Share Posted June 2, 2005 Originally posted by bearrock Travis's homeowners insurance policy covers him for negligent act committed on other property? Or do you mean that this happened at your residential neighborhood? (I understand this is not really germane to the discussion, just curious) well hes covered on his parents coverage...for example, if you go on a golf course and run over someone with a golf cart, homeowners ins. covers it (go figure, but thats the example given to me by an attorney) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 Originally posted by footballhenry well hes covered on his parents coverage...for example, if you go on a golf course and run over someone with a golf cart, homeowners ins. covers it (go figure, but thats the example given to me by an attorney) I get it, he must be covered by the personal liability clause. I understand it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warren Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 I'm not trying to be funny here, but how does that old saying go? "It's all fun and games untill someone loses an eye?" I want to know how pricey things could get if they went through your moms insurance. By the sounds of things, it doesn't appear you're going to get away scotch free. As unfortunate as this incident is, someone has already paid the price of losing some vision. Whether he is entitle to compensation from both parties is beyond my legal knowledge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footballhenry Posted June 2, 2005 Author Share Posted June 2, 2005 Originally posted by warren I'm not trying to be funny here, but how does that old saying go? "It's all fun and games untill someone loses an eye?" I want to know how pricey things could get if they went through your moms insurance. By the sounds of things, it doesn't appear you're going to get away scotch free. As unfortunate as this incident is, someone has already paid the price of losing some vision. Whether he is entitle to compensation from both parties is beyond my legal knowledge well the thing is i am not the culprit, i did not shoot the boy. as far as the plaintiff is concerned they were not worried about me other than as a witness of course. i was dragged in by Travis and co. because they are desperate and have no case (i mean Travis shot the boy, case closed). The plaintiff being entitled to compensation from both parties is not the issue as they are only suing ONE party, and are not concerned with me. it is extremely unfortunate that this kid has lost vision, i spoke with him today about it. it was jut a really bad incident that everyone regrets. But you need to take responsibility, again if I was the one that shot the boy then there would be no trial, I would send the paperwork to the insurance and be like "this is what happened", and be held accountable for damage I caused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footballhenry Posted June 2, 2005 Author Share Posted June 2, 2005 oh, and this transpired in Northern VA, not Richmond Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadKarma Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 The one thing you have going for you Henry is that you are not covered by any insurance company. In addition you have no seizable assets, are over 18, and could only be garnished on future earnings which I imagine would be very hard to collect on. They cannot send you to jail for this and are most likely looking to get your mothers insurance company in on this to help share some of the financial burden. I am not an attorney but this situation is not as bleak a picture as you probably think. Keep your head up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warren Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 Originally posted by footballhenry well the thing is i am not the culprit, i did not shoot the boy. as far as the plaintiff is concerned they were not worried about me other than as a witness of course. i was dragged in by Travis and co. because they are desperate and have no case (i mean Travis shot the boy, case closed). The plaintiff being entitled to compensation from both parties is not the issue as they are only suing ONE party, and are not concerned with me. it is extremely unfortunate that this kid has lost vision, i spoke with him today about it. it was jut a really bad incident that everyone regrets. But you need to take responsibility, again if I was the one that shot the boy then there would be no trial, I would send the paperwork to the insurance and be like "this is what happened", and be held accountable for damage I caused. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamingwolf Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 Originally posted by footballhenry hmm, so if someone comes up to you and punches you. you punch them back, and they go to punch you back but miss and break someones jaw, you believe that both people are equally liable?? i disagree fully and have trouble understanding otherwise. I mean the man attacked me first, and is the direct reason for the kids injury. this is why lawyers never produce justice, unless the case is so overwhelming they have no choice. Its also why I said you should run or get a lawyer to make you innocent. I must say I have lost all respect for you since you have denied any responsibility for your actions. Any adult or child paintballer that has any sense would have taken the shots and demanded the idoit shooting in a safe area to stop. There is absolutely no comparision to a fist fight, except in your mind in a court of law. lets be honest, with the right lawyer you could have slit the victims neck and be golden if of course there wasnt enough evidence. The real issue here is you fired in a safe zone. I wont ever forgive you for that, I dont even know you but if I could find your info I would deny your presence anywhere near a paintball event. For the very reason you said, you consider projectiles equal to fists. Sorry ass, a porjectile can sneak up on you far faster than a punch. Two paintballers drop their guns, and go to fists is a lesser offense than them popping rounds in a safe area. In your world its the same but not mine. I would really hope you can see the difference, unfortunately someone getting pegged in the eye didnt enlighten you. For that I pitty you for your sorry state. You shot in a safe area. That is unforgiviable to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footballhenry Posted June 2, 2005 Author Share Posted June 2, 2005 Originally posted by dreamingwolf this is why lawyers never produce justice, unless the case is so overwhelming they have no choice. Its also why I said you should run or get a lawyer to make you innocent. I must say I have lost all respect for you since you have denied any responsibility for your actions. Any adult or child paintballer that has any sense would have taken the shots and demanded the idoit shooting in a safe area to stop. There is absolutely no comparision to a fist fight, except in your mind in a court of law. lets be honest, with the right lawyer you could have slit the victims neck and be golden if of course there wasnt enough evidence. The real issue here is you fired in a safe zone. I wont ever forgive you for that, I dont even know you but if I could find your info I would deny your presence anywhere near a paintball event. For the very reason you said, you consider projectiles equal to fists. Sorry ass, a porjectile can sneak up on you far faster than a punch. Two paintballers drop their guns, and go to fists is a lesser offense than them popping rounds in a safe area. In your world its the same but not mine. I would really hope you can see the difference, unfortunately someone getting pegged in the eye didnt enlighten you. For that I pitty you for your sorry state. You shot in a safe area. That is unforgiviable to me. you sir have no clue what I have been through in this case. I have taken responsibility for MY part, and I do regret my actions in the matter. Its almost as if you are completely ignoring TRavis' actions and focusing soley on mine. Its ironic that you criticize me for lack of responsibility when it is Travis that caused the most harm ten-fold, and the one that is completely rejecting responsibility. Perhaps you have been confused but I was not the one that struck this kid, let it be known that when Travis was firing at me, the entire crowd of friends was behind me. I got out of the way behind shrubs and he still fired, while myself and everyone was yelling to stop, and then the kid got hit in the eye. Also, you try to make me out to be some heartless person, and im not sure why. I am very very sad that this family has had to go through all that they have. I spoke with the kid yesterday about it and learned that he has gotten over it but his parents just want to be reimbursed for all their expense, which is undertandable. Of course there is a difference between a paintball gun and a fist but my point was going back to accountability. If someone attacks you, and you respond, and that attacker seriously injures someone in the process, it is ludicrous to me to beleive that you as a defender could be as liable as the assailant. It truly makes no sense to me at all, perhaps you should focus your venom and anger on Travis in this situation, and not me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footballhenry Posted June 2, 2005 Author Share Posted June 2, 2005 Originally posted by warren Hey, I understand the incident completely. Just the other day I was at lacrosse practice and got hit by a shot. Hurt like he!! Jokingly I fired one back. Of course, this started a chain of a few shots back and forth until one got away and flew over the boards and into the stands. Fortunately, it missed the couple of people in the arena and no one got hurt. No big deal right? Could you imagine if a little kid got hit in the head with that flying lacrosse ball. Then it would be a huge deal. Those balls are solid and can do some damage. Luckily, no one got hurt and no one even thinks of the incident today. Not exactly the same thing...but I can understand how a little horsing around can get out of control. I feel bad for you, man. I really do. It's unfortunate and I hope it works out for everyone. well the thing is we werent horsing around. I mean it was serious, Travis clearly wanted to cause me pain for no reason really. You dont shoot at someone like that, furthermore his deposition yesterday basically said that another boy shot me when I turned my back, not him. Problem with that is (a) i never turned my back to him ( noone else shot except us it really makes me wonder where hes coming from or what his def. attorney is telling him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonJeremy Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 Footballhenry, GET A LAWYER! Beg or borrow for the money. I was sued once and my case was very easy in my mind. I was no where close to guilty and it was a very weak case against me. I considered defending myself because I feel I have a good understanding of the law and work with legal issues daily. I feel I am articulate and would be fine in court. I was talked out of it by some friends who were lawyers. I thought they were just trying to stand behind their bretheren. I hired an attorney and went to court. Things start happening fast in court. Half the time I didn't know what the judge was asking my attorney. I was on the stand, I was off the stand. The plaintiff attorney was grilling me, my attorney was objecting. My head was spinning! Thankfully the attorney I hired was competent and a verdict was issued in my favor. Don't know what would have happened if I didn't have representation there for me. Best money I ever spent! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footballhenry Posted June 2, 2005 Author Share Posted June 2, 2005 Originally posted by BadKarma The one thing you have going for you Henry is that you are not covered by any insurance company. In addition you have no seizable assets, are over 18, and could only be garnished on future earnings which I imagine would be very hard to collect on. They cannot send you to jail for this and are most likely looking to get your mothers insurance company in on this to help share some of the financial burden. I am not an attorney but this situation is not as bleak a picture as you probably think. Keep your head up. well my mom thinks im dumb, for obvious reasons, if i represent myself. Thing is the attorney wants that bc they can get more money obviously. If i do represent myself they cant get much, and there MIGHT be a chance that they will drop the case against me. The plaintiff is pushing hard to settle, as they all do, but i KNOW the defense is just waiting till my insurance gets into it so they can hit it with a settlement proposal. I honestly dont believe I owe the defense one penny. I didnt start the incident, I tried to stop the incident, and I didnt shoot the boy in his eye. Ive garnered enough advice to know I have a strong case but Im afraid if I bring in my moms ins. company it could get worse than if it was just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenaa Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 "I must say I have lost all respect for you since you have denied any responsibility for your actions" It's thinking like this that causes so much litigation in this country. Travis shot first. FH shot second then took cover. Travis continued to shoot even when FH yelled to him to stop and then hit the other boy. (Assuming the one sided story is an accurate portrayal). Travis is the responsible party. He started it and it was him who hit the boy. Had FH hit the boy, he would be responsible. FH, You need a lawyer. If you get strapped with a large judgement, it could haunt you for the rest of your life. It will ruin your credit. You'll never see a tax return, so estimate carefully. If you work for someone, your wages will be garnished. In the end, it would be better to cover the increase in your mothers Homeowners policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Sick Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 Definitely get a lawyer. Jury trials are a whole different animal than going in to represent yourself for a speeding ticket. I still fail to see why you should be held accountable when you didn't shoot the guy. To be held as guilty as the other guy is ridiculous, no matter what some "experts" on here say. Don't they usually post signs that say "watch out, paintballs are flying" or something like that. I'm going to ask my wife when I get home. She's a criminal defense attorney. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 No one is saying that he is "just as responsible as the other guy." Except the other guy's lawyer, of course. But he does face the potential of some percentage of the responsibility. And I bet the story that Travis tells on the stand will sound a lot different that Henry's story. Henry, go to the Bar Association and try to get a pro bono referral. You need to involve a lawyer here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footballhenry Posted June 2, 2005 Author Share Posted June 2, 2005 Originally posted by Predicto No one is saying that he is "just as responsible as the other guy." Except the other guy's lawyer, of course. But he does face the potential of some percentage of the responsibility. And I bet the story that Travis tells on the stand will sound a lot different that Henry's story. Henry, go to the Bar Association and try to get a pro bono referral. You need to involve a lawyer here. Yeah, its interesting because as I stated a little earlier Travis' story was completely different from mine, I mean it was confusing to say the least. Thing is it doesnt match up with anything that other people have said (witness accounts). Its funny how people remember things so differently as time goes by but I am not worried about Travis' account at all as it doesnt flow at all. For instance he said that he shot me 'twice' before I shot back (incriminating on his part) then he said that he shot at the ground not me (i got very confused with this statement) and then said that another boy shot me when i turned my back, not him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footballhenry Posted June 2, 2005 Author Share Posted June 2, 2005 Originally posted by Joe Sick Definitely get a lawyer. Jury trials are a whole different animal than going in to represent yourself for a speeding ticket. I still fail to see why you should be held accountable when you didn't shoot the guy. To be held as guilty as the other guy is ridiculous, no matter what some "experts" on here say. Don't they usually post signs that say "watch out, paintballs are flying" or something like that. I'm going to ask my wife when I get home. She's a criminal defense attorney. I would appreciate that alot, thanks:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footballhenry Posted June 2, 2005 Author Share Posted June 2, 2005 Originally posted by stevenaa "I must say I have lost all respect for you since you have denied any responsibility for your actions" It's thinking like this that causes so much litigation in this country. Travis shot first. FH shot second then took cover. Travis continued to shoot even when FH yelled to him to stop and then hit the other boy. (Assuming the one sided story is an accurate portrayal). Travis is the responsible party. He started it and it was him who hit the boy. Had FH hit the boy, he would be responsible. FH, You need a lawyer. If you get strapped with a large judgement, it could haunt you for the rest of your life. It will ruin your credit. You'll never see a tax return, so estimate carefully. If you work for someone, your wages will be garnished. In the end, it would be better to cover the increase in your mothers Homeowners policy. this is very true, thats why I am really split as to what to do. I just feel that if I represented myself in some form and did well/won my case then that would be an incredible asset to my future. it just discomforts me that the plaintiff party(defendant) against me is looking for me to bring in an ins. company... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 Originally posted by footballhenry this is very true, thats why I am really split as to what to do. I just feel that if I represented myself in some form and did well/won my case then that would be an incredible asset to my future. it just discomforts me that the plaintiff party(defendant) against me is looking for me to bring in an ins. company... What "incerdible asset" would that be? Of course they want you to bring in an insurance company. That is the deep pocket. However, I cannot see anything in these facts that would link this incident to your mother's homeowner's insurance policy, so they would almost surely tell you to shove off if you tried to bring them in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 Originally posted by footballhenry The prosecution attorney doesn't want me in this thing, he has told me that I shouldn't be involved as I am not the one at fault here (seeing as how Travis started it, escalated, and fnished it, shooting the young man). Um, just a point to make here. The prosecuting attorney doesn't care shiznit about you. His mission is to get whatever he can, for his client, and the heck with where it came from. (I'm not saying that's a character flaw. I'm saying that the ethics of his job require him to approach things that way.) Now, if he thinks the best way to get money for his client is to smile at you and tell you how he understands it's not your fault, and he's so sorry you got dragged in to this, then that's what he'll do. But his mission is money for his client. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gichin13 Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 Originally posted by bearrock As Om said above, there are attorneys who defend clients on contingency (if you lose, they don't get paid, if you win or pay less then claimed, then attorneys get percentage of the saved cost) If you do not have sufficient money nor asset, you can look into free legal services in your area or you may want to contact your local bar for pro bono services. In your case, however, if the trial is set for August, it sounds like the case is pretty far along. Have you been served discovery requests? Have you been deposed yet? Have you conducted any discovery? Also, by 3rd party defendant, do you mean that you were impleaded by the defendant or did the plaintiff sue both you and your friend? Contingency fee relationships are more typical on the plaintiff's side of personal injury cases as opposed to the defense side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 Originally posted by Gichin13 Contingency fee relationships are more typical on the plaintiff's side of personal injury cases as opposed to the defense side. Yes, but there are defense attorneys who take on case on contingency (more typical for corporate clients). It is a possibility, albeit a small one in case such as this. It appears moot anyway as FootballHenry seems set in representing himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 I don't think you have a very good case. Henry. in my eyes you have some responsibility for the accident. Yes your idiot friend has more because he was the one that actually shot the kid, but you are by no means innocent. Your friend and you will likely have to pay the medical costs. I wouldn't be surprised if it is split 50/50. BTW I doubt any attorney will represent him based on contingency, he is not suing for any money so no attorney would have an incentive to do it for free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gichin13 Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 Originally posted by bearrock Yes, but there are defense attorneys who take on case on contingency (more typical for corporate clients). It is a possibility, albeit a small one in case such as this. It appears moot anyway as FootballHenry seems set in representing himself. I do a lot of defense work and work with a ton of insurance defense firms. In the personal injury context, I know of no one that handles defense of a case like Henry's on a contingency. Not saying it is impossible, but it would not fit with my experience. I have heard of a lot of firms handling matters in a non-traditional billing approach, particularly for companies that send a ton of work to that firm. That would not be the case here. I am having a hard time seeing what coverage your mom would have that would apply to this claim -- maybe some type of umbrella policy. Frankly, those policies are really cheap anyway so even if the rates went up, it would not be that big a deal. At this point, it likely would be difficult to get the carrier into the case to defend it unless they were put on notice of a claim. I would suggest calling lawyer referral at the bar association or legal services which may defend it for free. Be forewarned that the quality of counsel may be spotty -- I know some great lawyers with Legal Services of Northern Virginia, I also know some really weak ones, and there is no telling who you will get. On a final note, you say he has to wear glasses now. That suggest that not only do you have personal injuries, but you may have an argument of permanency as to medical damages. If you have permanently damaged his sight, this could be a serious claim. You need a lawyer for sure. You do not want to represent yourself in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.