Page 1 of 2
A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 7:27 pm
by BoSoxGal
I read about the case when it happened, and now the family has filed a lawsuit alleging negligence on the part of the restaurant for not having an emergency cut-off button in the dining room to stop the rotation in an emergency, and for not safeguarding any access to the pinch points.
It’s a horrible incident but also seems like a one in a million thing that *had* to involve a significant lapse of supervision on the part of the parents. They claim in their lawsuit that he didn’t wander away from the table - he wandered away from them on the way out of the restaurant after they’d paid and were leaving. But a description of how he became stuck seems to clearly indicate he was well out of his parents’ line of sight to be climbing on or between tables and benches instead of walking the path toward the exit.
Yes, I’m an asshole. But clearly the parents are guilty of contributory negligence.
It isn’t the food that brings people to Atlanta’s iconic Sun Dial restaurant. It’s the experience.
There’s the glass elevator ride up the side of the Westin Peachtree Plaza. A quick, breathtaking jolt up more than 70 stories. Then, there’s the tri-level restaurant, surrounded by glass. Every table offers a view of the city, and the revolving floor presents a panoramic view of the skyline.
And yes, there’s the food. For more than four decades, the Sun Dial has been the spot for first dates, prom dates and family outings. Easter, like most holidays, would normally bring droves of patrons.
But on Friday afternoon, the restaurant became a chaotic scene of screams and pleas for help. While having a late lunch with his family at a table beside the windows, 5-year-old Charlie Holt wandered across the aisle to another table and a rounded bench backed up against an inner wall shortly after 3 p.m. Somehow, the boy got his head stuck between the furniture and the wall.
“We heard a bunch of screams and people yelling and we didn’t know what was going on,” Gustavo Anzola told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution on Saturday.
Anzola, who lives in Cumming, said family members and friends were visiting from his native Venezuela, so a group of 10 went sightseeing Friday.
“I was actually giving them a tour of the city and downtown,” Anzola said. “We went upstairs to see the view.”
Anzola remembers pointing out the new Mercedes-Benz Stadium to his cousin just when the commotion started.
“We didn’t know if it was a robbery or someone with a gun, we didn’t know,” he said.
Even when he saw adults trying desperately to move a table, Anzola couldn’t imagine what had happened. There was a loud boom, and the famous rotating floor stopped, and Anzola could hear a boy’s cries.
“It was only his head stuck, nothing else,” Anzola said. “I couldn’t believe what I was seeing.”
A friend from Venezuela, Marco Asuaje, doesn’t speak English, but has worked for 20 years as a first responder, Anzola said. Asuaje immediately rushed to help.
Instead of pulling the boy’s body, Asuaje urged others to help move the table to free him, Anzola said.
“We need people to push!” someone yelled, and Anzola jumped in.
As many as six people pulled the table as Asuaje used another piece of furniture almost as a lever to free the boy, who by then had lost consciousness.
“A few seconds later, he fell into his dad’s arms,” Anzola said.
The boy’s father attempted CPR on the boy before paramedics and police officers arrived. Charlie was taken to Grady Memorial Hospital, but did not survive. Anzola said he still can’t imagine how the boy had gotten stuck, and it was heartbreaking to watch.
“He must’ve put his head in that position just perfectly, perfect timing,” he said. “Everything came together perfectly for this kid to get himself in this position.”
His group of family and friends were devastated to find out Charlie had died, Anzola said. The restaurant closed after the incident and is expected to remain closed indefinitely, a spokesperson said Friday.
“Our thoughts and prayers are with his family,” hotel manager George Reed said in emailed statement.
The hotel did not respond to a request Saturday for additional information on the restaurant’s future.
Charlie’s family asked for privacy and prayers Saturday afternoon and declined to release a photo of the boy.
“No words can express their loss,” an emailed statement read. “If you have a loved one, please give them an extra hug today.”
At the hotel, soft music played through the lobby Saturday afternoon as guests tinkered on cellphones on the couches and sipped Starbucks from the in-house coffee shop. The exclusive elevators leading to the restaurant were closed, with ropes blocking entrance and sign apologizing for the inconvenience.
Mike and Susan Grove, in town to catch the Braves game Saturday night, found out about the boy’s death after checking in Friday with their grandsons, ages 1, 7 and 9.
“We were going to take them up there and let them look around. And it was closed,” the husband said. “That’s when we found out.”
LaTonya Norman, a Stone Mountain resident who is staying at the Westin for “getaway” with her boyfriend, called the Sun Dial magical.
“The ambiance of it. If you’ve never done it, it’s an experience,” she said.
She’d wanted to take her boyfriend, Sekou Fade, to the restaurant. Instead, she was heartbroken to learn of the boy’s death.
A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 8:14 pm
by RayThom
BoSoxGal wrote:I read about the case when it happened, and now the family has filed a lawsuit alleging negligence on the part of the restaurant for not having an emergency cut-off button in the dining room to stop the rotation in an emergency, and for not safeguarding any access to the pinch points... But clearly the parents are guilty of contributory negligence...
CNeg on the part of the parents seems fitting, however, I feel fairly certain the Westin is going to feel the full brunt by not having a "kill switch," whether it would have save the boy's life or not.
Re: A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 8:52 pm
by ex-khobar Andy
I am not sure that I see the contributory negligence. If the kid had climbed a table and fallen off and hurt himself, yes, that's an ordinary and predictable danger which parents and even a five-year-old should reasonably understand and take precautions to avoid. But getting caught between a table and the rotating wall -- that's something which should have been designed out from the beginning. There should be a red button readily accessible just like on an escalator; and all tables etc. within (say) a couple of feet from the wall should be easily movable. Not a difficult design concept.
Reminds me of those glass doors you sometimes see where there is no hinge in the usual sense, but it rotates on an axis maybe six inches in from the edge. So when it's open there is a six inch gap - large enough for a child's arm or more. If the wind catches that door the arm comes off. Looks nice but it does not take much to see the potential danger.
Re: A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 9:19 pm
by Joe Guy
Reminded me of this tragedy at Disneyland from long ago...
On July 8, 1974, nine days after the attraction opened, 18-year-old hostess Deborah Gail Stone was accidentally crushed to death between two walls of the building between 10:35 p.m. and 10:40 p.m. A narrow channel between a stationary wall and a rotating wall was open and Stone either fell, stepped backwards, or tried to jump from one stage to the other as the rotating wall began to move (it moved every 2 to 4 minutes which was how long each act was). Her death was pronounced at 11:00 p.m., when the carousel was being reset for a new cycle. One of the audience members heard Stone's screams and notified park staff. Other employees didn't notice the dismembered body until the end of the show and thought that Deborah's death screams were part of the show. By the time the audience member and the staff got to her, it was too late. Stone died from her injuries. Stone's parents sued Disneyland for the death of their daughter, which resulted in a small settlement.
source
Re: A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 10:07 pm
by MGMcAnick
BoSoxGal wrote:Yes, I’m an asshole. But clearly the parents are guilty of contributory negligence.
I don't think you've ever had a five year old boy, have you?
Re: A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 10:20 pm
by BoSoxGal
You’d be wrong; I had a 3 and 5 year old stepdaughter and stepson who I parented nearly full time for just shy of 3 years. Beyond that, and before that, I had well over a thousand hours of intensive childcare experience with kids from newborn to preadolescent over years of babysitting, working in a daycare, and caring for my nieces and nephews.
And it’s really disgusting when people try to dismiss the parenting opinions of childless people anyway, as if we weren’t children ourselves and don’t have the capacity to make intelligent observations.
Oh, and then there is my law degree - I actually studied torts and have an idea or two about contributory negligence.
PS:

Re: A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 10:27 pm
by MGMcAnick
Obviously your step-children and all of those you've ever observed were perfect, just like you.

Re: A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 11:54 pm
by BoSoxGal
No asshole, I never said that. Keeping young kids safe in strange environments requires paying attention to them and not the fucking phone or whatever other thing is more fucking important to too many parents these days. It’s hard work parenting and too many people are fucking lazy. Maybe if the parents had bothered to hold this kid’s hand, or at least keep him in their line of sight, he never would have gotten into a position to have his poor skull squeezed and to die in agonizing fucking pain screaming for his mommy and daddy to save him - the mommy and daddy whose job it is to SUPERVISE him and keep him safe.
These parents can’t take responsibility for their own negligence. I respect parents like those of the toddler that was allowed to go wading in the shallows of a Florida pond and was grabbed, drowned and crushed to death by an alligator; they didn’t sue, they settled for Disney addressing the common sense issue of alligators in Florida waterways with signs for people who have no common sense and don’t understand that ‘no swimming’ in Florida probably means ALLIGATORS. This couple should settle for Marriott putting up signs that say ‘don’t leave your child unattended because he might get his head caught between the revolving wall and a booth if you do’. I don’t think parents whose own lack of supervision and basic common sense causes their child to die an agonizing death should profit financially from that death. Sure, Marriot can install a closer cut-off switch - I believe they already have, anyway.
But this is a one in a million, likely never happen again kind of case because an unsupervised child was engaging with the design in a way that falls outside the parameters of what a design engineer would have reasonably anticipated - because once upon a time, if people took their children out to fancy restaurants at all, they took care to ensure that their children were well-behaved and they didn’t let toddlers or young kids run around a restaurant on their own. Now that’s SOP and I don’t think the restaurants should be held liable for injury - what if a kid runs into a waitron and gets scalding coffee or food spilled on him/her? Sue the restaurant?
Re: A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:48 am
by dales
And it’s really disgusting when people try to dismiss the parenting opinions of childless people anyway, as if we weren’t children ourselves and don’t have the capacity to make intelligent observations.
Not dissing anyone's opinions, however actually
raising children for 18+ years is far different than being an auntie (or and uncle which I am) or taking a few courses in child development. Trust me on this, studying child development and actually raising children are two different things as I've done both.
Both my daughters are strong and confident women ( one is 28 and the other is 35).
IMHO

Re: A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 4:41 am
by Joe Guy
If your child wanders off in a restaurant, you shouldn't have to worry about him being crushed by a rotating wall.
Just a thought. And I have thousands of hours of intensive thought experience.
Re: A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:34 am
by BoSoxGal
Yes and I HAVE raised children, if you’d bothered to read my whole post - and beyond that, there are many seriously fucked up neglectful, abusive and/or damagingly overindulgent parents in this world who think they’re doing a great job. I’ve worked in the child welfare system, I know this. I also know there are a lot of parents in this world who think their kids love them a whole lot more than their kids actually do, and there are millions of estranged parent/child relationships. You guys can toot your horns all you want but just having impregnated someone or shot a baby out the twat doesn’t a perfect parent make - in millions of cases, it doesn’t make a parent at all. When I read self righteous puffery like this I just laugh anymore - I know better. There is no special wisdom-filled fairy dust that procreating sprinkles on people, and really good parents are not very common - this is very evident by the millions upon millions of very fucked up walking wounded adults stumbling around in the world.
Those parents failed to supervise their child and he died because of it; design flaw or no, if he’d been supervised he’d never have put his head between a booth and a wall in the first place. It doesn’t take a child development course or having a baby to know this, it’s common fucking sense.
Re: A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 8:13 am
by datsunaholic
Common sense isn't that common.
Too many parents are far too self-absorbed to be bothered with what their rugrats are doing. In many cases they haven't had a whole lot of experience, because by the time the kids are 3 months old they're in daycare 10 hours a day. I'm not saying mothers should give up their careers to have kids- in fact it's damn hard to raise kids on a single income nowadays. But with so little time devoted to actually raising their kids, shoving them off on generally overworked and underpaid daycare workers (many of them working "under the table"), then having teachers continue "raising" the kids, it's no wonder there are so many feral kids running around. My Mom gave up her career shortly before I was born, not entirely by choice but she didn't return to the workforce for another 17 years, after my little brother was in grade school. Sacrifices were made, that's for sure. I see so many parents nowadays trying to keep up the pre-child lifestyle. Their kids are learning from media, internet- not from social interaction or from their parents.
They've (the parents) have grown up in a world where the expectation is that everything is 100% safe. Truth is it's not, things have been made safeR mostly by trial and error, yet there are a lot of unsafe things around. When I was a kid, yeah, we ran loose a lot- not in restaurants! There, we sat at the table and only got up when we were leaving. But the rest of the time? The things we were allowed to do would probably be considered child neglect nowadays. My Dad was a volunteer coach- little league, junior football, youth basketball. Coaching was his thing. To give my mom SOME respite my Dad would haul the older of my 2 sisters and me along to practice. At the middle school gym, the high school football stadium, the ball fields. Or the Bingo hall where the gear was stored. We'd run everywhere. He'd give us the keys to the car so we could sit in the car and listen to the radio, and we'd play like we were driving. I'd run around the stadium collecting cans and bottles, or go under the bleachers looking for lost change. We'd tromp through the forest behind the ballfields. How the hell did we survive? This was the 1980s. But we WERE taught that stuff out there could hurt you. And sometimes it did. I never got more than berry vine scratches, but my sister ended up getting stitches in the ER after we were playing with a swinging gate (running and jumping on it, making it swing open) when she slipped and ripped her arm open on the exposed twisted top wires. Ouch.
Re: A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:52 am
by Guinevere
Well what is it folks — are today’s parents ignorant and neglectful or are they helicoptering over the kids until they are finished college?
Or maybe all these great and sweeping generalizations about parents and parenting are just that.
What a shame about that poor little boy. I feel so sad for him and for his parents. There is nothing worse than losing a child.
Re: A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:35 pm
by Big RR
I have to agree; and parental contributory negligence or not, I do think that the device Marriott put in the public restaurant appears to be unreasonable dangerous and could have been made much safer by installing safety interlocks that are available and affordable. It could just as easily have been and adult injured or killed, and IMHO it appears that the culpability or Marriott far exceeds that of the parents (although I'll admit I know very little of Georgia's contributory/comparative negligence laws, so I don't know where this comes down legally). However, it is clear that Marriott has some significant moral, if not legal, responsibility here; somehow I imagine if someone left a loaded gun lying around and a kid picked it up and killed himself we would not be hearing the same arguments that the parents are at fault.
Yes, some parents do not supervise their kids properly, but most do most of the time. And don't forget, kids that age are like Houdini in being able to get out of anything and disappear in plain sight. I won't blame these parents until I know exactly what they did or didn't do; and I'd lay you any odds you wish that, regardless of what they did/didn't do they will always blame themselves.
And lest you think that I am just another lawyer trying to set up future bonanzas, I am not a tort lawyer and I have often not brought suit when I could. One time I recall my daughter had her front tooth knocked out in softball practice; I used the school insurance coverage as well as my own, and was still out several thousand dollars for the oral surgery and the implant. I could easily have sued because the coach should have insisted the players wear their mouth guards (or even have them), but I met instead with the coach and the department head and discussed that the only thing I wanted was to not see this happening again; the school bought mouth guards for the team and insisted the players wear them (and I have never heard of another payer being injured this way)--my daughter even played for that coach the rest of the season and the following season.
BSG--
This couple should settle for Marriott putting up signs that say ‘don’t leave your child unattended because he might get his head caught between the revolving wall and a booth if you do’.
do you honestly believe that? Marriott doesn't have to make an unsafe situation safer, just put up a warning? Really?
Re: A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:41 pm
by MajGenl.Meade
It's the "leave unattended" part that I find rather er.... unevidenced.
"Look out the window - there's the stadium!"
Parents look. Child zips off.
I don't know about others here - the superhuman watchers with wrist-chains and a child attached like a handcuffed leather case full of jewelry - but there was many a time in the past when one or more of our little darlings pulled a Houdini like that. Fortunately with no terrible consequences. Except that time Jamie had a rather belligerent dog suddenly attached to his face. But I was driving home from work on that occasion so it wasn't my inattention in question.
Re: A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 2:00 pm
by Big RR
Exactly Meade.
Re: A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:43 pm
by Sue U
Well, it looks like it's time for yet another installment in my continuing on-line educational series, Sue U Presents Personal Injury Law in Theory and Practice (a/k/a "Torts for Tots"). Today's program examines liability issues in the case of the Spinning Restaurant of Death. You have all read the facts of the case in the OP, which everyone agrees is tragic, so let's get straight to the litigation potential.
First, "contributory negligence" is a defense offered to mitigate or negate the liability of an otherwise culpable defendant, essentially by claiming that the injuries were partly or fully the result of the injured person's own negligent act or omission. The general definition of a negligent act/omission is that a person knows or reasonably should know that the thing being done/not done is likely to result in injury. A 5-year-old child has little capacity for anticipating and appreciating ("foreseeing") the consequences of his actions and therefore, as a matter of law, cannot be assessed any liability for negligence, whether "contributory" or otherwise.
To the extent the parents might have any responsibility in this case, it would not be "contributory" negligence, but "joint and several" negligence together with the restaurant defendant(s) -- if the parents' negligent acts/omissions were found to be a "substantial contributing factor" in causing their child's injury and death. But remember, the parents would be the ones bringing the case as plaintiffs on behalf of their child for his injuries (and only derivatively for their own emotional distress and economic loss). The only way the parents could be assessed any "negligence" is if the restaurant defendants asserted a counter-claim against them for contribution. And again, the restaurant defendants would have to prove that the parents knew or reasonably should have known that this injury was foreseeably likely to occur. That's a pretty high bar -- particularly where the restaurant's own defense will be that no 5-year-old has ever been killed this way before, so we couldn't possibly have foreseen this risk of injury. As a practical matter, such a counter-claim will almost certainly never be brought -- especially where it is likely to just piss off a jury who will see the restaurant as blaming the victims for its own failure to address a significant safety issue -- i.e., positioning its furniture in such a way as to make this type of injury possible, failing to provide for readily accessible power cut-offs, and/or maintaining a rotation speed too fast to timely address potential problems (all of which -- and more -- would be areas for expert testimony).
More likely is that the restaurant would bring design defect and product defect claims against the designer(s) and manufacturer(s) of the spinning restaurant architectural/mechanical systems -- either as cross-claims if the parents have named Design Corp. and Spinning Products Co. as defendants, or as third-party claims if they haven't. (However, depending on the age of the restaurant and whether these component systems are ruled to be a "building" rather than a "product," the claims may be barred by a "statute of repose," which is a subject for another day.)
Additionally, the restaurant's culpability is likely to rest primarily on the specific negligence theory known as "premises liability," which generally provides a heightened standard of care for "business invitees" of a commercial enterprise and requires property owners/managers to inspect for and discover potentially dangerous conditions of the premises, taking appropriate steps to prevent injury.
Please continue your discussion with this information in mind, which entitles you to exactly 0.0 continuing legal education credits, but hopefully makes you a little better informed.
Re: A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:27 pm
by Long Run
Sue U wrote:
which entitles you to exactly 0.0 continuing legal education credits
That's a shame since it's my reporting year (and your description is as educational as anything I've heard the last few years).
A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:30 pm
by RayThom
I still think Westin is going to take it up the ass on this lawsuit.
Is there a legal term for that?
Re: A Strange and Horrible Case
Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:32 pm
by Big RR
Thanks for the practical su8mmary of the law in this regard, sue; the benefit of your experience is appreciated.