KINGS ISLAND TRIAL updates and discussion

[CoastersRZ]

Now that shows the power of the search feature, and having a good memory at that for remembering yet another wonderful post from Shaggy!

[Browntggrr]

I thought the injuries involved cracked sternums, not injured hips.

You thought all 20+ people had broken sternums and no other injuries?

its like ppl that drink too much and get a bad liver......"oh lets sue the maker of the drink, cause it tore up my liver" Knowing the risks of drinking :S

Please tell me this comment was a lame attempt at humor.

This will end up being a case of "he said, she said." What I mean by that is: since RCCA started the original construction that was later taken over by Paramount, who is going to be accountable if the plaintiff claims the accident is due to faulty construction/ design/ materials. Then add is the lawsuit that KI filed in 2000 http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2000/11/2...sland_sues.html This case is going to get very messy, and everyone will be getting involved.

[CrashOverRided]

I thought the injuries involved cracked sternums, not injured hips.

You thought all 20+ people had broken sternums and no other injuries?

its like ppl that drink too much and get a bad liver......"oh lets sue the maker of the drink, cause it tore up my liver" Knowing the risks of drinking :S

Please tell me this comment was a lame attempt at humor.

This will end up being a case of "he said, she said." What I mean by that is: since RCCA started the original construction that was later taken over by Paramount, who is going to be accountable if the plaintiff claims the accident is due to faulty construction/ design/ materials. Then add is the lawsuit that KI filed in 2000 http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2000/11/2...sland_sues.html This case is going to get very messy, and everyone will be getting involved.

yes i couldnt decide which to use.......i almost went with the hot coffee bit at McDonalds...lmao....

[Dalefan]

If you think people who go to Holiday World who are injured or allege they are do not also sue the park, you are very sadly mistaken.

In 2003 at Holiday World just before ERT on the 2nd night of Stark Raven Mad was to start, a woman fell off of The Raven roller coaster. She stood up after undoing her belt and worked her way out of the lap bar. She died. The park closed and the ERT was called off after the accident happened, and they kept the park closed the next day out of respect for the woman. The inspecters checked The Raven to make sure that Holiday World wasnt at fault. The woman who fell out was blamed for the accident. The family of the woman tried to sue the park, but wasnt able to do to the park not being at fault. The woman was a member of ACE. This caused alot of short term problems for ACE. Holiday World didnt have another coaster event till 2008. I was at the 2003 Stark Raven Mad event when one of the owners had told us that the accident happened. We all walked out of the park not hardly saying anything.

[The Interpreter]

If you think people who go to Holiday World who are injured or allege they are do not also sue the park, you are very sadly mistaken.

In 2006 at Holiday World just before the 2nd night of Stark Raven Mad was to start, a woman fell off of The Raven roller coaster. She stood up after undoing her belt and worked her way out of the lap bar. She died. The park closed and the coaster event was called off after the accident happened and they kept the park closed the next day out of respect for the woman. The inspecters checked The Raven to make sure that Holiday World wasnt at fault. The woman who fell out was blamed for the accident. The family of the woman tried to sue the park, but wasnt able to do to the park not being at fault. The woman was a member of ACE. This caused alot of short term problems for ACE. Holiday World didnt have another coaster event till 2008.

Uh, the woman's family filed a federal lawsuit against the park:

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-14174313.html

http://masstort.org/site/index.php?id=31

The matter was resolved out of court in 2007. It is NOT a fair statement to say the park was determined not to be at fault, nor that it was. A settlement settles the matter but does not resolve fault.

[Dalefan]

When Cedar Fair took over the park in 2006, they tried to do everything but tear down SOB to fix the problems it has had. As far as i know from what the park has said, when the last thing with that lady happened with the brain injury claim, the park has said that they will talk about what to do with SOB over the winter. And for a lawyer to say that the lady with the hip injury needs to have more surgerys over her life time is just claims. The lawyer has to have the medical records of the lady that states this. With the way they do surgerys now, alot of people with hip injurys are getting more advanced replacements. I know that because i work for a hospital in surgery. I think SOB's fate was bad when the 2006 accident happened. The park just needs to get rid of it all together rather then it being SBNO. From what i heard, the signs stating that its the tallest and fastest wooden coaster have been removed.

[Dalefan]

If you think people who go to Holiday World who are injured or allege they are do not also sue the park, you are very sadly mistaken.

In 2006 at Holiday World just before the 2nd night of Stark Raven Mad was to start, a woman fell off of The Raven roller coaster. She stood up after undoing her belt and worked her way out of the lap bar. She died. The park closed and the coaster event was called off after the accident happened and they kept the park closed the next day out of respect for the woman. The inspecters checked The Raven to make sure that Holiday World wasnt at fault. The woman who fell out was blamed for the accident. The family of the woman tried to sue the park, but wasnt able to do to the park not being at fault. The woman was a member of ACE. This caused alot of short term problems for ACE. Holiday World didnt have another coaster event till 2008.

Uh, the woman's family filed a federal lawsuit against the park:

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-14174313.html

http://masstort.org/site/index.php?id=31

The matter was resolved out of court in 2007. It is NOT a fair statement to say the park was determined not to be at fault, nor that it was. A settlement settles the matter but does not resolve fault.

The park wasnt at fault. She undid her belt, worked her way out of the lap bar and stood up. . I didnt know that it was resolved. I knew about the suit. The state inspectors do find who is at fault when a accident happens.

[SOB_TOM]

According to the article, she is suing due to faulty mechanical practices by the park. I am taking the attorney at exactly what he said here, but he is not suing over the building, he is suing over the fact that Kings Island "Does not properly inspect their rides." (paraphrasing)

Knowing exactly how Kings Island inspects their rides, and remembering what happened to the broken beams (inner cracking of the wood causing the beam to break,) how exactly was Kings Island supposed to catch the incident beforehand?

The state of Ohio requires a thorough *sight* evaluation every morning, not ultrasound on every beam. If that were the case, then no coaster would be ready to open by 10, even if the checks started at close the night previous.

I say this court case is thrown out in its early stages. All KI has to do is plop down the last 7 years of maintenance records (and yes, they have every single one signed by a maintenance worker AND a ride operator,) showing that the ride was inspected every single day, and the case is done.

Too bad she didn't take the settlement money ahead of time.....

[standbyme]

The park wasnt at fault. She undid her belt, worked her way out of the lap bar and stood up.

This is an example of why our legal system drives me nuts...common sense is thrown out the window. It would appear to me that it was the lady's fault because she unbuckled the belt and worked her way out...but a lawyer will argue that the park should have made it impossible for her to do this.

[dakota2112]

According to the article, she is suing due to faulty mechanical practices by the park. I am taking the attorney at exactly what he said here, but he is not suing over the building, he is suing over the fact that Kings Island "Does not properly inspect their rides." (paraphrasing)

Knowing exactly how Kings Island inspects their rides, and remembering what happened to the broken beams (inner cracking of the wood causing the beam to break,) how exactly was Kings Island supposed to catch the incident beforehand?

The state of Ohio requires a thorough *sight* evaluation every morning, not ultrasound on every beam. If that were the case, then no coaster would be ready to open by 10, even if the checks started at close the night previous.

I say this court case is thrown out in its early stages. All KI has to do is plop down the last 7 years of maintenance records (and yes, they have every single one signed by a maintenance worker AND a ride operator,) showing that the ride was inspected every single day, and the case is done.

Too bad she didn't take the settlement money ahead of time.....

If all of the above is hypothetically true, then this tells me one thing and one thing only: the state's inspection requirements are what failed and are at fault. After all, the purpose of inspection is to prevent accidents, and that prevention failed in this case (hypothetically).

[Browntggrr]

And for a lawyer to say that the lady with the hip injury needs to have more surgerys over her life time is just claims. The lawyer has to have the medical records of the lady that states this. With the way they do surgerys now, alot of people with hip injurys are getting more advanced replacements. I know that because i work for a hospital in surgery.

How long will my hip replacement last?

Despite a common misbelief that they only last a few years, hip replacements should last at least 10 to 15 years in most patients, and some studies have shown them to last well beyond 20 to 25 years. However, in a patient who is very young, heavy or active, a hip replacement may "wear out" or "loosen" prematurely.

http://www.victoriasportsmed.com/index.php...aq&Itemid=5

I am not a lawyer, but if I was a juror, present a doctor to support that claim is all I would need to rule in favor of the plaintiff.

[74Gibson]

Paying for medical expenses and pain and suffering is one thing but punitive damages is another. As SOB:TOM said the beam that failed had internal issues that would not have been caught by maintenance checks. It was not visible. Not knowing all the facts of this case makes me very uncomfortable discussing what type of settlement there should be but, I can't help repsponding.

This poor woman gets my complete sympathy and I imagine she suffers considerable pain, missed work, stress, etc...

Again we are having the discussion of the ills of our judicial system. Far too many people sue as a way to win the lottery and now genuine issues are muddled by dishonest and greedy ones. I've heard it's not like this in other countries and I've become ashamed of our legal culture.

[khaoskat]

^^ Agreed. When I ride a coaster, any one, I don't expect to be injured.

and they are gonna have to prove beyond a shadow of doubt

Umm, technically, all she has to do is show by a preponderance of the evidence. Beyond a shadow of doubt is criminal.

[khaoskat]

^^ Agreed. When I ride a coaster, any one, I don't expect to be injured.

and they are gonna have to prove beyond a shadow of doubt

Civil court is a reasonable doubt.

Criminal court is beyond a reasonable doubt.

Again, incorrect, Civil trials are preponderance of the evidence.

[khaoskat]

Correct, though some states do not allow that as an instruction, others do. Again, there is more than a little likelihood this case will still settle before trial. Cases often settle on the courthouse steps or in the judge's anteroom.

They also often settle while a jury is deliberating and before they reach a verdict.

[khaoskat]

And the whole thing boils down to reasonableness. Did Kings Island and Cedar Fair take reasonable steps to protect the guests who rode Son of Beast? If so, they will probably not be held liable. If not, then the question of causation arises...did the guest's injuries in fact stem from riding Son of Beast? If not, the defendants are still not liable. If so, then liability may be found.

Let's not forget that Cedar Fair/KI can attempt to blame the manufacturer and contractors who did the work. They can argue that even with the reasonable diligence that they have done in inspecting, etc, that there were design flaws that were the result.

[Gabe]

I'm guessing that the state of ohio's inspection requirements and KI's are two different things. KI's are almost certainly more stringent. To me anyway, if the park can show that not only did the ride meet state guidelines but the park's as well, with testimony to support that, I don't see how a jury will award her anything. If KI loses, though, I'd expect an appeal, depending on the dollar amount awarded.

[Captain Picard]

The beam that failed had internal issues that would not have been caught by maintenance checks. This is a good reason to have insurance and good that you to have the right to sue.

I imagine she suffers considerable pain and I imagine she suffers from dealing with this trial. If you ever had to go through something like this you know it's no walk in the park.

[Beast1979]

It would appear to me that it was the lady's fault because she unbuckled the belt and worked her way out...

Which is why the entire trainload was injured.

Assuming this is the 2006 incident I'm thinking of (It is, right? It's impossible to tell anymore), the ride DID malfunction! The people WERE injured, almost certainly as a result of the RIDES MALFUNCTION! A timber broke and the trainload of people were injured because of it!

I don't understand what the argument is here over if it was the lady or not, it was the ride that malfunctioned! Whether the ride itself caused all of the injury or she aided to it is still up in the air, and whether it was PKI's fault or the ride itself all bets are off, but for the most part the ride malfunctioned and hurt her.

Liability is gonna be a b*tch with this one, who's fault was it, or was anyone at fault, yada yada yada, but it would appear to me (Keeping in mind I have no experience in the legal system at all), but I would guess that the lady will be saying they had spotty maintenance (May or may not be true), and Kings Island will defend by saying no, we did our job, and likely pointing the finger elsewhere, perhaps right back at the lady.

[Guest TombraiderTy]

^I believe standbyme is talking about the death that occurred on the Raven at Holiday World several years ago.

[TylerRider]

Hmmm. So what is she claiming? Again, from the article (and complaint):

..."The defendants, Cedar Fair and PKI, acted with conscious disregard for the rights and safety of the plaintiff by failing to exercise care in the inspection, maintenance and condition of the Son of Beast," her Springboro attorney John Scaccia wrote in the complaint....

It should be stated that claims made in a lawsuit establish only one side of a case and are not to be taken as fact unless and until proven in a court of law. A settlement is also not an admission of liability or guilt.

Did the Article say PKI? Are they alowed to say it because it happened in 2006?

[Browntggrr]

What need to be understood is that is not a typical ambulance-chaser type of lawsuit. People were hurt on a ride that was expected to be safe.

When playing a contact sport, falling off a Sea-Doo etc., you can prepare your body to take a hit. That way the energy is absorbed as opposed to shocking the body. In training, boxers will take hits on purpose so that their body gets used to the abuse that is expected during the bout.

The reason why I say that is, these people were not expecting that type of physical contact, thus, they had no way to prepare for the violent jolt from the cracked beam. The only way for us to even compare that type of jolt is if you were in a car crash, or sucker-punched.

If this woman is claiming she could have up to 3 hip surgeries, there has to be reason for it. If the claim has no merit, then it will come out during the trial. But I'm willing to bet, since her attorney mentioned it to a newspaper, he has more than enough evidence to support the claim.

As far as liability, that falls on the park's shoulders. They took her money, they inspected the ride, they are the ones that paid for the ride to be built. They approved the ride. Once this suit is finished, I anticipate the park to file another lawsuit similar to the one that was filed in 2000 against RCCA, the designer, and the product vendor.

[Beast1979]

And what of the fate of the ride itself? I can't imagine a win for her would be good for Son of Beast at all...

[CrashOverRided]

And what of the fate of the ride itself? I can't imagine a win for her would be good for Son of Beast at all...

totaly agree!!!

[SOB_TOM]

Here is what I don't understand about the debate:

Her claims of needing these hip replacements are based on KI's inability to safely maintain the ride. Since KI followed OSHA and state regulations when performing the maintenance checks, and have the sheets to prove it, this suit has no merit.

You have to realize that we are looking into this WAY too much. Based on the wording of the suit, she does NOT have a leg to stand on. KI backs up the maintenance work by cataloging every days maintenance sheet and saving them for seven years, as well as supporting evidence from the state of Ohio stating the beam in question failed from the inside out, and therefor would not have been picked up on maintenance checks. *NOTE!* This is based on what the woman is claiming.

Now, looking a little deeper, I believe that area was retracked that year, and therefor the beam was replaced, however again, it has stability issues from the inside out. No way to check for those (unless you ultrasound each individual beam.) This is also something that the lumberyard would not notice, and would go all the way back to the sawmill, where the beam did not have a destination.

And let me ask this question in response to an earlier post: What you stated was that the maintenance practices at theme parks within the state of Ohio are not up to standards due to this incident. It is easy to point out problems, however, solutions are normally hard to come by. What is yours? Ultrasound every beam of a coaster every day? Every month? Once a year, like it is done already?

BTW, I have a feeling the fate of the ride has already been decided.....

[Beast1979]

stating the beam in question failed from the inside out, and therefor would not have been picked up on maintenance checks.....

and therefor the beam was replaced, however again, it has stability issues from the inside out. No way to check for those (unless you ultrasound each individual beam.)

If the ride has malfunctioned like that without being able to prevent it, and has the ability to do it again, than this ride should not be operating until it is possible to fix it.

[maverick2007]

And what of the fate of the ride itself? I can't imagine a win for her would be good for Son of Beast at all...

IMO the park knew a lawsuit would come out of the 2006 incident and chose to open it a little while later (with modifications) anyways. I don't believe KI found this move particularly surprising. I agree with Tom that this rides fate has been decided and I think this decision is not expressly affected by this particular lawsuit.

[SOB_TOM]

With thinking like that, it is the end of the second coaster age.....

How, prytell, can you prevent *freak* accidents like this one from occurring? This is a one in a million chance, it just happened at our park.

[The Interpreter]

Assuming all the above is true (which I do not), as between riders injured by a ride whose safety cannot be assured and the park which installed such a ride (again, this is an assumption), why should riders bear that risk? And why should such a ride (assuming that is the case) remain available to injure yet more riders, at what point cannot be predicted, only that it will?

I don't buy that this ride is so unsafe that reasonable inspection cannot assure its safety. That's utter nonsense.

[Kris_2009]

I think she should win, I mean come on 27 other people got hurt. Why shouldn't she be entitled to some sort of care? I think she should have all of her medical bills paid for. She should receive some money to supplement her time off work (if she worked). If she gets a Million dollar settlement thats crazy....