Jump to content

Last 7-2006 Son Of Beast Accident Case Settled


The Interpreter
 Share

Recommended Posts

...The civil lawsuit is scheduled to go before a jury Monday in Warren County Common Pleas Court.

Colleen Hegge, who has represented a half-dozen Son of Beast riders in court, said a settlement isn't out of the question in Yanik's case.

"Talks have continued, and they have gotten better," she said.

Yanik suffered a shoulder injury that required surgery following the ride. He has spent $22,521 in medical bills to date, according to court documents and has suffered $22,000 in lost wages.

The lawsuit is asking for $500,000 in compensatory damages and more than $350,000 in punitive damages. All the other lawsuits but one were settled prior to trial. Jennifer Wright of Defiance took her case to a jury in October 2009 and was awarded $76,364 in compensatory damages and an undisclosed amount in punitive damages....

http://www.daytondai...al-1109729.html

There is much information at the cited link...

Note particularly this quote from Ms. Wright, the only plaintiff to win a verdict in court from this accident:

..."All I ever wanted was the truth to come out and no one to ever be hurt again,"...

You might want to read that quote several times.

I note that case was settled after the verdict and before the punitive damages portion of the trial was concluded. The terms of that settlement were not disclosed.

The ride has not operated since.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It clearly says before you enter the ride that if you dont want to ride it, you dont have to. They choose to get on the ride. Everytime I got on SoB, I never got injured. It passed mantince tests that day. Hell, I even rode it that day. Nothing that wasn't normal. All of these people are over reacting, probably for insurance claims or settlements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It clearly says before you enter the ride that if you dont want to ride it, you dont have to. They choose to get on the ride. Everytime I got on SoB, I never got injured. It passed mantince tests that day. Hell, I even rode it that day. Nothing that wasn't normal. All of these people are over reacting, probably for insurance claims or settlements.

I believe that most of the 27 riders in 2006 we hurt in some way, but i do not think that the 2009 issue is real ! And obviously the state feels that the ride is safe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ But she turned down a settlement and went through the hell that is trial because ...“All I ever wanted was the truth to come out and no one to ever be hurt again,”... As Terpy quoted above.

If I was responsible for something that caused undeniable harm to someone... I doubt a shoulder injury requiring surgery was faked, I would feel guilty. The state has cleared SOB to run. Management has stated that they are not happy with the ride experience and will not open SOB until they are. If I were in charge, I would never run SOB if I genuinely believed it could hurt others. Being sore from a rough ride is one thing... getting injured is entirely different.

Oh, did I mention lawsuits are expensive. I wonder what the true cost of SOB is (including all the settlements and legal fees).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well let's all keep in mind that the real problem happened while paramount owned the park!, And since CF has owned the park have been no "true" issues.

Not saying that this lady in 2009 is faking just that the state of Ohio cleared the ride.

The real problem (the 2006 incident) happened a mere six days after Cedar Fair completed its acquisition of the Paramount Parks. Who might've really been to blame for Son of Beast's accident aside, Cedar Fair technically owned the park, and unfortunately for them, technically is all that counts.

Paramount did try to sue the company responsible for the ride's design and construction, and was unsuccessful.

And I would argue - even as a fan of the old ride - that there have been "true" issues before and after that day. How many of us here have felt a little wobbly afterwards; had a sore back; not been able to really enjoy the rest of the park or concentrate at work the next day because your back is still aching; felt chest pain during the course of the ride simply from the sheer whipping and jackhammering of the trains? Maybe some people have even been seriously injured, and just not reported it...

It clearly says before you enter the ride that if you dont want to ride it, you dont have to. They choose to get on the ride. Everytime I got on SoB, I never got injured. It passed mantince tests that day. Hell, I even rode it that day. Nothing that wasn't normal. All of these people are over reacting, probably for insurance claims or settlements.

It would seem indisputable that this woman had a medical issue. We can't entirely say that the ride was at fault (and indeed, that's what the courts are for). But you know what? It doesn't matter... The ride experience was poor. I was a fan of the ride. I rode it multiple times when it was open, and would ride it again today if it re-opened. But come on... The experience could be better. It could. It's that simple. It was rough - moreso, even, than one would expect from "The tallest wooden roller coaster on Earth." The ride isn't closed soley because of this one woman. What has Terpy taught us about A and B and causality? At most, consider her "the straw that broke the camel's back" - final, irrefutable evidence that the ride had gone too far.

Because even if it didn't cause the injury she claims, the fact that the public weren't surprised by her claim said a LOT about the ride, didn't it?

Perhaps we'll get a better Son of Beast. Perhaps we'll get a better ride in it's place. But they won't let things get worse, and that's a good thing.

Sigh. What a shame that Paramount Parks couldn't wait another year or two for the invention of Intamin's pre-fabricated track wooden coasters (which, by the way, occupy the second, third, and fourth spot on the 'world's tallest wooden coasters,' eclipsed only by Son of Beast... And if anyone could do a wooden loop, it would be Intamin...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I would argue - even as a fan of the old ride - that there have been "true" issues before and after that day. How many of us here have felt a little wobbly afterwards; had a sore back; not been able to really enjoy the rest of the park or concentrate at work the next day because your back is still aching; felt chest pain during the course of the ride simply from the sheer whipping and jackhammering of the trains? Maybe some people have even been seriously injured, and just not reported it...

I, for one, never had any issues. In fact the roughest ride I had on Sonny was its debut year. :P Anymore its Vortex I have issues with now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well let's all keep in mind that the real problem happened while paramount owned the park!, And since CF has owned the park have been no "true" issues.

Not saying that this lady in 2009 is faking just that the state of Ohio cleared the ride.

June 30, 2006...Cedar Fair, after a period of due diligence, acquires Paramount Parks, including Kings Island, and becomes solely responsible for their operation and maintenance.

July 9, 2006 (NOT June, as the article describes, and NOT on the sixth day of Cedar Fair's ownership, as stated in the post just before this one), the incident that precipitated the instant lawsuit occurred.

Paramount Parks was not responsible for this matter, as Cedar Fair assumed all liabilities when it acquired ownership. Cedar Fair also made the decision the morning of July 9 to open and operate the ride. Paramount Parks was not involved in any way in that decision.

Also, the ride reopened, sans loop and with lighter trains, July 4, 2007, only to close again in June 2009 for reasons never publicly explained. Though many enthusiasts and observers have speculated as to why the ride closed at that time, there has been no confirmation of why, but the park's general manager has said that he is not happy with the ride experience, and the ride will not reopen unless and until he is.

I believe that most of the 27 riders in 2006 we hurt in some way, but i do not think that the 2009 issue is real ! And obviously the state feels that the ride is safe.

What issue in 2009? The lawsuit discussed in this thread was precipitated by the July 2006 incident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well let's all keep in mind that the real problem happened while paramount owned the park!, And since CF has owned the park have been no "true" issues.

Not saying that this lady in 2009 is faking just that the state of Ohio cleared the ride.

June 30, 2006...Cedar Fair, after a period of due diligence, acquires Paramount Parks, including Kings Island, and becomes solely responsible for their operation and maintenance.

July 9, 2006 (NOT June, as the article describes, and NOT on the sixth day of Cedar Fair's ownership, as stated in the post just before this one), the incident that precipitated the instant lawsuit occurred.

Paramount Parks was not responsible for this matter, as Cedar Fair assumed all liabilities when it acquired ownership. Cedar Fair also made the decision the morning of July 9 to open and operate the ride. Paramount Parks was not involved in any way in that decision.

Also, the ride reopened, sans loop and with lighter trains, July 4, 2007, only to close again in June 2009 for reasons never publicly explained. Though many enthusiasts and observers have speculated as to why the ride closed at that time, there has been no confirmation of why, but the park's general manager has said that he is not happy with the ride experience, and the ride will not reopen unless and until he is.

I believe that most of the 27 riders in 2006 we hurt in some way, but i do not think that the 2009 issue is real ! And obviously the state feels that the ride is safe.

What issue in 2009? The lawsuit discussed in this thread was precipitated by the July 2006 incident.

What I meant by the real problem was that it was Paramounts's "Band- Aid" fix's that caused the 2006 incident. And Paramounts was very responsible for the 2006 Incident, they knew of issues on the ride and half ass fixed the issues then passing the issues along to Cedar Fair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I meant by the real problem was that it was Paramounts's "Band- Aid" fix's that caused the 2006 incident. And Paramounts was very responsible for the 2006 Incident, they knew of issues on the ride and half ass fixed the issues then passing the issues along to Cedar Fair.

Pardon me, if someone wants to correct this, but I do not believe there was a "band-aid" fix.

From reading the state report it seemed that Paramount Parks' policies for maintaining the ride were appropriate and ok'd by the state of Ohio. As pointed out by our good friend The Interpreter - Cedar Fair assumed all liabilities and made the decision to operate the ride on that fateful morning.

What occurred was a cracked vertical timber. According to the ride's design this should have been fine and it should have been able to operate with enough support to continue running until the problem could be noticed. Unfortunately, the design didn't come through and a slight deviation in the track caused a bump between two track segments. When the trains ran over that bump, it created the jolt that injured the riders. This was all available in the state report, which can still be found online and which is public record.

I believe the state faulted the design of the ride and made recommendations to improve it.

They did not fault "Paramount's band aid fix."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

from the article posted above:

“They would fix them in a Band-Aid style and then wait and see what happened,” he testified. “They never really stopped and said ‘we’ve got a problem with this ride as a whole.’ ”

Wright said she would love to help Yanik win his case.

maybe i'm just making this up, but i thought i read on this very site that ohio's department of agriculture had stated in the past that they really do not know much about roller coasters and all they can truly do is check the rides structural integrity. if what i'm remembering correctly, how does wright know that the park had "problem with this ride as a whole?"

...and maybe it's just me, but to me the "band-aid style" approach seems fairly reasonable. why would you do a complete overhaul on the entire ride if there is only one problem area at that time? that's like cutting your hand with a knife and instead of placing a band-aid on it, you go and have full body cosmetic surgery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I meant by the real problem was that it was Paramounts's "Band- Aid" fix's that caused the 2006 incident. And Paramounts was very responsible for the 2006 Incident, they knew of issues on the ride and half ass fixed the issues then passing the issues along to Cedar Fair.

Pardon me, if someone wants to correct this, but I do not believe there was a "band-aid" fix.

From reading the state report it seemed that Paramount Parks' policies for maintaining the ride were appropriate and ok'd by the state of Ohio. As pointed out by our good friend The Interpreter - Cedar Fair assumed all liabilities and made the decision to operate the ride on that fateful morning.

What occurred was a cracked vertical timber. According to the ride's design this should have been fine and it should have been able to operate with enough support to continue running until the problem could be noticed. Unfortunately, the design didn't come through and a slight deviation in the track caused a bump between two track segments. When the trains ran over that bump, it created the jolt that injured the riders. This was all available in the state report, which can still be found online and which is public record.

I believe the state faulted the design of the ride and made recommendations to improve it.

They did not fault "Paramount's band aid fix."

Actually "they" did:

In a video interview, Rick Schmizze, who investigated the 2006 accident for the Ohio Department of Agriculture, said owners of the amusement park have known since 2000 there were problems with the ride.“They would fix them in a Band-Aid style and then wait and see what happened,” he testified. “They never really stopped and said ‘we’ve got a problem with this ride as a whole.’ ”

http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/dayton-news/last-son-of-beast-accident-case-going-to-trial-1109729.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lawsuits stemming from the July 2006 incident have been settled.

Son of Beast last ran in June 2009.

Ohio appears to have a 2 year statute of limitation for negligence:

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2305.10

Thus, the time period to file for any incidents alleging bodily injury that occurred up to and including the time Son of Beast last operated, or the alleged injury was incurred or first discovered, has not yet completely expired. Other causes of action may appear to exist, and have varying Statutes of Limitation. Many lawyers do not file such actions until right before such expiration, for a myriad of reasons.

There is no legal advice contained herein. In addition, the facts and circumstances of any particular matter may well warrant the attention of a licensed legal professional, a lawyer. If you have, or think you may have, a legal question or case, you should consult a competent attorney licensed to practice in the appropriate jurisdiction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just post 'em folks:

...Yanik was the last plaintiff suing Cedar Fair for the accident on the Son of Beast wooden roller coaster in Mason, Ohio.

A weak support was blamed for the bumpy ride, and the Son of Beast was closed briefly. It was shut down for good in 2009 after another complaint.....

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011/03/21/Park-settles-roller-coaster-injury-suit/UPI-14361300730825/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have actually got off the Son of Beast roller coaster and felt a little bit "beat up". It has also caused me a bad headache.

I am a pretty stout guy 6'4" and 230#. I am not a "small guy" by any means. I can handle the SOB most times, but I have experienced a few times that

I did not feel great after riding. I chose to re-ride again at another time knowing that I might be sore after riding.

I have (what I felt) good rides on some times, and other times, not so well. Has anyone ever had a ride experience like that?

Not sure of the fate of SOB, but I hope maybe Cedar Fair might be able to do something positive with this ride. If they can't, maybe they can recycle parts of the

coaster, like the lift hill and maybe other sections that may or may not be affected. We will see???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two quotes from the article:

- "was shut down for good in 2009". This may end up being true.

- "Cedar Fair had known of problems with the ride since 2000". I guess this is a generic enough statement that it is hard to dispute, but seems a little misleading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two quotes from the article:

- "was shut down for good in 2009". This may end up being true.

- "Cedar Fair had known of problems with the ride since 2000". I guess this is a generic enough statement that it is hard to dispute, but seems a little misleading.

Misleading because you used "Cedar Fair" as opposed to "owners" for the actual quote. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...