Plan B Forum

Posted: **Wed Mar 23, 2011 10:09 pm**

Woman settles Calif. trash injury suit for $535K

Associated Press March 23, 2011

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

(03-23) 13:43 PDT Santa Ana, Calif. (AP) --

A former Southern California woman who claims she suffered neck injuries from a tossed trash bag full of tissue paper has bagged a $535,000 settlement.

Anne Burdette's attorney tells the Orange County Register that his client has settled a lawsuit accusing a janitorial company of negligence.

Burdette claimed that in 2007, an office cleaner tossed a 3- to 5-pound bag of tissue paper down a stairwell at the UPS center in Anaheim where she worked. Burdette claims it struck her in the head and aggravated an existing neck injury.

Her attorney, Alex Galindo, says Burdette couldn't return to work and has since moved to Hawaii.

An executive for the janitorial company, Empire Building & Environmental Services of Alhambra, declined to comment Wednesday.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... z1HSlNBAo7

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:22 am**

Lawyers, what would we do without them?

yrs,
rubato

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:30 am**

She worked in a stairwell?

...but seriously, I've heard of re-injuring yourself just from stress. Like say, if her initial injury was from a car accident; being struck again, in the same area, even lightly, brings back strong memories and associations of the trauma; which can result in muscle spasms and the same symptoms being experienced as during the first injury.

If she was caught by surprise by this bag, then all the more shock, to cause her system to overreact and relive the trauma.

I've seen people's hands seize up, or have them loose their breathe, just from loud noises.

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:53 am**

SueU? I am asking nicely. Do you pursue this? Or should we call an opportunistic cunt trying to give lawyers a bad name for what she is?

I'm thinking give her a push...

Obviously we need more information....

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:41 am**

"Her attorney, Alex Galindo, says Burdette couldn't return to work and has since moved to Hawaii"

Well yes - does Obama know about this cure for unemployment?

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2011 1:39 pm**

Took me a while to get around to looking at this thread; from the subject line I thought it had something to do with E-bay.

Let me say first of all that insurers (and self-insured entities) do not pay out more than half a million samolians in a settlement if there is no substance to the claim. And a settlement is by definition something less than the full value of actual injuries in a case -- in recognition of the fact that (1) no rational defendant would pay more in settlement than the value of damages that are likely to be proved at trial, and (2) plaintiff is willing to take less than full value to avoid costs and delays of further litigation as well as the risk of an adverse verdict at trial. My rule for a "good" settlement is that everyone walks away equally mad.

As to this case itself, obviously there is a substantial lack of information in the story: to begin with, we don't even know what the injury is, what her preexisting condition was, what the permanent residual bodily damage is, what her age and life expectancy are, what she did for a living or how the injury affected her life. All we know is she got hit in the head with a 3- to 5-lb weight dropped down a stairway (and we don't even know how far it had fallen or at what speed it hit her, where it struck her, what position was she in, etc.). Imagine yourself on a stairway minding your own business when a sack of sugar dropped from (one? three? five?) floors above clobbers you on the head. Do you think it is inconceivable that you might have some serious and permanent injury as a result? Neck fracture? Herniated discs? What if, for example, the woman had had a prior surgery to fuse her cervical vertebrae (not uncommon), and now that fusion has been destroyed? What if this woman's job was as a fitness instructor, or a ballet dancer, or a violinist, and she can no longer move her body to perform her job duties? What if she had been making $50,000/yr, still had 30 years of work life ahead of her and is now totally disabled (that's $1.5 million in economic loss alone)? It is simply impossible for any of us to say that this case settled for either too much or too little. I will leave it to the parties' own sound judgment about what was right for them -- after all, what is wrong with letting people decide between themselves how to settle a claim?

rubato wrote:Lawyers, what would we do without them?

You would be living in a world ruled by the law of the jungle. Pick any society without lawyers and a functioning judicial sytem, and see how well they're doing -- in business, government, criminal justice, civil dispute resoultion, or virtually any other area of human interaction. (Somalia, anyone?)

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2011 3:32 pm**

Brava!

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2011 4:19 pm**

While I'd say the sack of sugar isn't really an equivelent analogy (give is a major factor) mass accumulates quickly in a fall and it doesn't take much height for anything to cause injury.

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:23 pm**

Sue U wrote:T

Let me say first of all that insurers (and self-insured entities) do not pay out more than half a million samolians in a settlement if there is no substance to the claim.

"Samolians"? Do they come from Samolia?

Posted: **Thu Mar 24, 2011 11:49 pm**

Same firm where janitors do the hidden camera looky-loo?

Posted: **Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:57 am**

Sue U wrote:Took me a while to get around to looking at this thread; from the subject line I thought it had something to do with E-bay.

Let me say first of all that insurers (and self-insured entities) do not pay out more than half a million samolians in a settlement if there is no substance to the claim. ... "

So now we learn that BY DEFINITION all tort settlements are just and no one ever has to go out and find evidence to PROVE it is true unlike the physical sciences ...

Pure horseshit.

yrs,
rubato

Posted: **Fri Mar 25, 2011 4:53 am**

rubato wrote:
Sue U wrote:Took me a while to get around to looking at this thread; from the subject line I thought it had something to do with E-bay.

Let me say first of all that insurers (and self-insured entities) do not pay out more than half a million samolians in a settlement if there is no substance to the claim. ... "
So now we learn that BY DEFINITION all tort settlements are just and no one ever has to go out and find evidence to PROVE it is true unlike the physical sciences ...

Pure horseshit.

yrs,
rubato

WTF? Are you retarded, or do you just spew crap for the sake of being an asshole? Did you actually bother to read what I wrote?

Sue U wrote: My rule for a "good" settlement is that everyone walks away equally mad. ... It is simply impossible for any of us to say that this case settled for either too much or too little. I will leave it to the parties' own sound judgment about what was right for them -- after all, what is wrong with letting people decide between themselves how to settle a claim?

No, of course you didn't.

Posted: **Fri Mar 25, 2011 2:48 pm**

Thank you SueU for that rationally reasoned and logical reply. You answered my question.

Posted: **Fri Mar 25, 2011 4:13 pm**

Timster wrote:Thank you SueU for that rationally reasoned and logical reply. You answered my question.

You're quite welcome. This has been another installment in the series Personal Injury Law: Policy and Practice, brought to you as a public service on behalf of trial lawyers everywhere.

Posted: **Sat Mar 26, 2011 4:40 pm**

Obviously, in the referenced article, tissue is the issue.

A bag so light that it didn't seem right
that a woman's neck
could be mangled like heck
by such a light weight
in a strange twist of fate.

One response wasn't rash
from one who saw cash
and the trip to Hawaii
might be the reason why he
complained as he did
and wanted to rid
this world of litigators
and lawsuit instigators.

My opinion is just
that they do as they must.
Officers of the courts
will deal with torts
and analyze laws
and point out the flaws
So we'll all have our say
at the end of the day.

Posted: **Sun Mar 27, 2011 12:50 am**

You may think it's funny, but it's snot.

Posted: **Sun Mar 27, 2011 10:56 pm**

Joe Guy wrote:Obviously, in the referenced article, tissue is the issue.

No, theweight that dropped on her head is the issue. Regardless of whether it is a bag of tissue or a bag of rocks, 5 lbs is still 5 lbs.

Posted: **Sun Mar 27, 2011 11:24 pm**

Scooter wrote:
Joe Guy wrote:Obviously, in the referenced article, tissue is the issue.
No, theweight that dropped on her head is the issue. Regardless of whether it is a bag of tissue or a bag of rocks, 5 lbs is still 5 lbs.

I'm not the one who made tissue the issue. The article wouldn't generate any interest at all if it weren't a bag of tissue that caused the injury.

The issue of the actual weight of the bag and its affect on the injured person is not important when someone writes an article that is slanted against lawyers and an obvious attempt by the author to make the plaintiff look like someone who is lying about her injuries.

Posted: **Mon Mar 28, 2011 12:30 am**

Scooter wrote:
Joe Guy wrote:Obviously, in the referenced article, tissue is the issue.
No, theweight that dropped on her head is the issue. Regardless of whether it is a bag of tissue or a bag of rocks, 5 lbs is still 5 lbs.

If both were dropped from 50', would you rather be hit by a large plastic trash bag filled with 15lbs of upholstery foam or a 10lb shot-put?

Posted: **Mon Mar 28, 2011 12:48 am**

Whichever one strikes me with less force. Can you demonstrate, using the appropriate physics equations, which one that would be?

Plan B Forum

Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k

Re: Bag Of Snot Rags Nets Woman $535k