kshoe Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 I know we have some lawyers on this board and I'm not trying to insult them but this lawsuit is just ridiculous. http://www.kmov.com/topstories/stories/kmo...it.6cb022b.html This part in particular is just sickening: "Reports out of Mississippi say that the family is also suing tow truck company and driver of the truck Hancock hit as well as the driver of the disabled vehicle that called for the tow truck." Note to my family memebers, if I ever do something stupid and completely within my responsibility please do NOT sue innocent people...particularly if their only crime was 1) getting in an accident or 2) being a good samaritan to help the people in that accident. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 If I was the family I would just let this whole story die. There is a lot of stuff that can come up about their son in a court case that hasn't made it into the public realm yet. There is no need for his name to get tarnished further. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SShoe Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 >Note to my family memebers, if I ever do something stupid >and completely within my responsibility please do NOT sue >innocent people...particularly if their only crime was 1) >getting in an accident or 2) being a good samaritan to help >the people in that accident. I can't promise anything... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbofive Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 I'm going to take my one parting shot and then let this one go. The family is probably just pissed that his life insurance policy and assets were to be paid out to his crack dealer and not them and they had to try and cash in somehow. Might as well sue me, too. I saw a picture of the aftermath of the accident on the Arena cam. And sue ClayCo, as well, for seeing the whole thing once every 10 minutes and doing nothing - there's some big money. To the family - drop it, it sucked, move on. Those parties can probably sue you somehow, actually... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 I love Lawyers, they keep me off the bottom of the lowlife job chart Official Billikens.com sponsor of H Waldman Official Sponser of the Stemmler and Ahearn could and would have helped club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Law Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 we aren't all blood sucking scum like these guys. But like many other professions, the sins of a few are made to represent the many. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 I am a transactional corporate attorney, so the plaintiff's bar is my sworn enemy. That being said, why are the lawyers to blame and not the families or the judicial system that permits such claims? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIG BILL FAN Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 It smacks of greed and I hope they never get a dime, that said if someone is obviously intoxicated no establishment should continue to keep serving liquor to that person. They have an obligation to the public not to contribute to that danger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SShoe Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 There is blame for all to go around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnark Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 Even though the car is really messed up, the passenger seat is fully intact and relatively undamaged. Despite Hancock being drunk, likely stoned, and talking on his cell phone, he may still be alive had he worn his seatbelt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Law Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 >I am a transactional corporate attorney, so the plaintiff's >bar is my sworn enemy. That being said, why are the lawyers >to blame and not the families or the judicial system that >permits such claims? bad time to mention I'm working on plaintiff's derivative suit? We lawyers are to "blame" because one of our colleagues decided to take the case and run with it. Most likely this case doesn't survive an MTD, as is the case with many such suits (my father as a physician had to deal with many of these suits filed against him by greedy patients and attorneys yet the only time he ever saw the inside of the courtroom was as an expert witness) but the fact is there was some lawyer willing to listen to the Hancock family and take the time and effort to file the case instead of saying "you have no case, get over it." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westy03 Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 Its been reported on several occasions that a seatbelt would not have made a difference. A bar from the tow truck went through the windshield and nearly decapated Josh, his head was barely hanging on. Just to clear that up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMM28 Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 >I know we have some lawyers on this board and I'm not trying >to insult them but this lawsuit is just ridiculous. > >http://www.kmov.com/topstories/stories/kmo...it.6cb022b.html > >This part in particular is just sickening: > >"Reports out of Mississippi say that the family is also >suing tow truck company and driver of the truck Hancock hit >as well as the driver of the disabled vehicle that called >for the tow truck." > >Note to my family memebers, if I ever do something stupid >and completely within my responsibility please do NOT sue >innocent people...particularly if their only crime was 1) >getting in an accident or 2) being a good samaritan to help >the people in that accident. This isn't the lawyers fault. This is the family's fault for being so damn stupid. Their son was a partier, drunk, druggie. He died as a result of HIS actions. The tow truck was on the shoulder of an 8 lane highway. There were 3 other lanes for him to avoid the flashing lights. Sounds like the parents are at the same level of intelligence as the son. Why not sue the Cincinnati Reds for releasing him because he was a drunk that showed up overweight to spring training and constantly hungover/late? If not for that, maybe he would have never encountered St Louis. Why not sue himself for being a poor parent. He raised a child that obviously was not very thankful for the opportunity to be a major league baseball player, which is an opportunity many would kill for. There is plenty of blame to go around, most of it falling on people with the last name of Hancock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbofive Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 ZING! Rightfully so if you ask me... I agree w/ whoever posted it earlier... if I was stupid enough to encounter that fate, I would hope that my family would issue an APOLOGY to all parties involved, and bury my a$$. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted May 24, 2007 Author Share Posted May 24, 2007 Jimbofive, you make a good point. If anything, the tow-truck driver should be suing the Hancock family for their drunk son putting his life and the lives of the other car at risk. 1) The Hancock family is stupid for going through with this lawsuit, no doubt about it 2) I think the lawyers should take some of the blame because you have to believe it was an ambulance chaser that convinced them to do this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Four Seventeen Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 I'm not saying Major League Baseball players shouldn't go out and drink and carry on, but when Chris Duncan catches college co-eds at Humphrey's better than fly balls in left field, that might be an issue Walt Jocketty might want to address next off-season. He was at the bar last night and I heard a lot of snide Hancock comments being made. I got a good chuckle out of some of them, but most were pretty off-base. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbofive Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 Duncan's had some nice diving catches on the outfield grass this year, and as long as he keeps those up, he can dive on any grass he wants, as far as I'm concerned. Besides, Duncan's only 26. I've heard a few recent "glory" stories of 32-year-olds taking the old notch-knife out in the Village®. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Four Seventeen Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 That doesn't surprise me, knowing that a bunch of old Lower Level Walsh guys that were sophomores my freshman year came back for a Spring Pantie Raid in March, now that LL Walsh is an all-girls floor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoveforVouk Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 What is the issue with a 26 year old going to Humphrey's with a couple of friends? I am sure several posters on this board, and I include myself in this, who are young professionals like to frequent local watering holes after a long day in the office. I would rather hear of Duncan stopping by Humphrey's on a Wednesday night for a drink than Jeter and A-Rod who stop by clubs in Manhattan and give dome to every dude in site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 "He was at the bar last night and I heard a lot of snide Hancock comments being made. I got a good chuckle out of some of them, but most were pretty off-base." How's it go: Hello pot, i'm kettle? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbofive Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 LOL! i just think of them setting up a table, but not for autographs, of course... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NashvilleBilliken Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 Exactly what I was thinking, Moy! We hear stories everyday from this guy about going to Humphries. I like to booze it with the best of 'em and wish I was back in school at times. But don't be a hipocrite... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milwaukee Billiken Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 Clearly you have a misconception about lawyers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted May 25, 2007 Share Posted May 25, 2007 i wonder if i was a player if after this suit is filed i would think about taking the patch off of my uniform? i think this suit reflects poorly on the hancock family that the father "has an obligation to represent on all issues" and he did so as he thinks best in filing the suit and i would have to think about putting on a jersey with a patch honoring this particular family - would wear it, but probably not happily Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ Posted May 25, 2007 Share Posted May 25, 2007 I am a trial attorney but I'll have to admit, this one sounds like a real loser. I hope the lawyer that took this isn't doing it on a contingent fee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.