June 03, 2005
An Allergic Reaction to Stupid Lawsuits?
This morning when I was listening to the radio, I heard a story about a local man suing over inappropriate Taser usage. I went and looked up the story at the St. Louis Post Dispatch. The description of the incident is quite strange.
Days before the event, [David] Lash, a construction worker, suffered a job-related injury in which he lost a quarter of his right index finger, the suit says.About 3 a.m. on Jan. 11, he suffered an allergic reaction to medication at his stepdaughter's house, the suit says, and his son, David Lash Jr., came to the house to restrain him, said Lash's attorney, Stephen Wyse.
Since when does an allergic reaction to medication make it necessary to restrain someone? What, were they trying to stop him from scratching himself? (After all, as Mom always says, “scratching it just makes it itch more.”)
In all seriousness, I suspect it was most likely some other sort of bad reaction (I hate it when the word allergic is tossed around like that) to a medication, probably one of the psychiatric sort, or else that’s just some sort of weird excuse.
Lash Jr. had his father pinned to the floor when Moberly police arrived, Wyse said. When Lash Sr. moved his shoulder, two officers, whose names are not given, shot both the father and the son with a Taser, the suit claims.Then, after Lash Jr. was taken to another room, the officers continued administering the shocks to Lash Sr., kicked him in the groin and neck, reinjured his finger and caused him to lose two front teeth, the suit says.
"Reinjured his finger?" So did he lose the previously reattached portion of his finger, or did a new quarter fall off?
"I'm an ex-cop, and I'm familiar with the use of force and when it's necessary and when it's not, and they had no reason to use force here," [Stephen] Wyse [Lash's attorney], said. "They had no reason to start Tasering his son and him."
I’d be interested to see what the officers’ version of events is. However, if the guy was going so crazy that his son had to drive over, restrain him, and call the cops, it seems likely that they did indeed have a reason to start tasering him. I wonder what injuries Lash Jr. and the police officers sustained at the hands of Lash Sr.
After the officers put a stranglehold on Lash Sr., he began to vomit, and an ambulance was called to take him to the hospital, Wyse said.At the hospital, he was unconscious for most of 10 days, Wyse said. He suffered kidney failure, and he received dialysis treatments for two months, Wyse said.
Hmm. I searched all over and couldn’t find any connection between Taser guns and kidney failure. People who claim Taser guns are dangerous seem to think they can cause damage to the heart, lungs, or skin, not the kidneys.
Again, I wonder what drug he had an “allergic reaction” to and what other side effects it has. What other medical problems does he have? Could something else have caused his kidney failure and/or hospitilization?
Not only does the lawsuit seek unspecified damages from the police department, it also seeks to cash in on $5 million from Taser International Inc. because “Taser, the police department and other defendants failed to train the officers properly.”
I didn’t know that Taser was responsible for ensuring the training of every single officer who uses their product. Does anyone more familiar with this subject know if similar tactics have been used against gun manufacturers?
It could turn out differently, but it certainly seems like a frivolous lawsuit so far.
Posted by illuminaria at 02:38 PM | Comments (1)
April 18, 2005
Warning: 'W' Now Copyrighted.
If anyone was thinking conservatives can't file stupid lawsuits...
A supporter of President Bush is suing the Republican National Committee and one of its suppliers, claiming they stole his design for the ubiquitous "W" bumper sticker logo in the 2004 campaign.Jerry Gossett of Wichita Falls, Texas, says he pitched his design for a logo to the RNC's supplier of campaign materials, The Spalding Group of Lexington, Kentucky, in 2001 and to the RNC in 2003, and was turned down.
...
Gossett, inspired by scenes of firefighters raising a flag at the site of the World Trade Center, drew an American flag fluttering from a large W, next to the number 43 for Bush as the 43rd president.
The Spalding design reads "W '04" instead of "W 43," and is rounded, unlike Gossett's rectangular design. Hollander said key elements in the company's design had emerged as early as 1999.
So it sounds like the only similarity between the two was the 'W.' Imagine that, using a 'W' for George W. Bush's campaign. Only one person in a billion could be genius enough to come up with that idea, obviously it was stolen.
Plus, check out the design. Yeah, it's an interesting idea and it might be improved with some work, but it's not particularly attractive. I'm not suprised that the RNC wasn't interested in it. I really doubt they excitedly called up their supplier and pitched the idea to them.
Gossett says he is a loyal Republican and voted for Bush in 2000 and 2004, but has become jaded by his experience."The big RNC against little me, there was absolutely no chance to win," he said.
Yeah, um, I don't care if it was the RNC suing you, this is a lawsuit that shouldn't be won.
Posted by illuminaria at 03:43 PM | Comments (0)
March 22, 2005
Baby Mix-Up
Check out this story.
Donna Johnson was in North Suburban Medical Center after having a baby. The day after the birth, a nurse brought her the baby to nurse. She thought it was odd that the baby wouldn’t nurse, as she had successfully nursed it the day before. She took off the baby’s cap and realized it was not her baby. She freaked out, the nurse who brought the baby freaked out, and then they brought her the right baby. Since the incident she has remained unsure whether or not the baby was really hers, even though DNA testing was done to confirm that it was.
What is Johnson doing now? Why she’s suing, of course. Note that the wrong baby never actually nursed, so there was never any chance of a disease being passed around. Many people would just let it go. Mistakes in the medical world happen all the time, no matter how many policies are in place to prevent them. Why sue if nothing actually came of the mistake? However her lawsuit claims that she suffered post-traumatic stress disorder and is now “obsessed by the possibility that she may lose her baby.” The suit also claims loss of earnings, because she has not been able to return to work, and loss of consortium, because her husband has been “deprived of marital intimacy with his wife”– probably because his wife is acting kind of crazy.
The article also says that she and her husband had been trying to conceive for 10 years. I know from experience that under those circumstances women often get pretty upset and obsessive over conceiving, and sometimes those feelings don’t go away after the baby is born. Something tells me she may very well have had many of the same problems if this incident had not happened. Also, many women who plan to return to work after birth never actually do, especially if it is their first baby. As for the loss of consortium claim - uh, welcome to parenthood, people.
Of course the hospital will probably settle. Given that they already have identification bands that must be checked every time the baby is moved, I doubt that they will be able to really change their policies much to ensure that it never happens again. If you ask me, this is a great reason to house newborns and their mothers in the same hospital room.
Posted by illuminaria at 12:16 PM | Comments (1)