Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
reddirt
climber
PNW
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 19, 2011 - 10:24pm PT
|
I guess REI is an easy target because, for many here, all big corporations are evil. Seems like the venom should be more directed at the known bad guy. I see no reason to pass such judgment on REI from I've read so far.
REI is the bad guy. They are not backing equipment of their own brand. They said fuk off by refusing to accept her initial request for compensatory damages, and taking it to court. The court said REI is liable for their own branded equipment. REI once again said fuk off by appealing. They are beholden to no one, not their insurance company, not that insurance companies attorneys.
I can only hope that the chances of the success of their appeal is as small as some think it is:
as posted on t-a-y
"They're saying they can't pay proven damages established at trial, because of the terms of a commercial contract (which is all an insurance policy is). That argument may have had some relevance before REI's liability was established at least 3 separate times (e.g., on summary judgment, at trial, and on appeal), but not at this stage. REI's probability of success at this point is incredibly small. By appealing this time, they're electing a tactic intended to limit their liability (by delaying payment and increasing Monika's estate's costs). "
|
|
habitat
climber
grass pass
|
|
|
May 19, 2011 - 10:47pm PT
|
"I'm a little bothered that people are so quick to spew venom at REI when their level of fault is unclear."
Rankin,
Did you click on the link in the very first post and read some of what is written there?
The superior court ruled in Monika's favor.
REI appealed it.
The appelate court ruled in Monika's favor.
REI is again appealing it.
What is so hard to understand?
Boycott REI and their MADE IN CHINA junk.
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
May 19, 2011 - 10:50pm PT
|
As a dedicated REI hater, I'd love to pin this on them, but in this case, MH & JE nail the reality right between the eyes.
If you want to hate anyone in this tragic situation, hate the insurance industry.
|
|
habitat
climber
grass pass
|
|
|
May 19, 2011 - 10:58pm PT
|
Who's talking about hating anyone? What is at issue here is that a company many of us have supported for so long has demonstrated so clearly that they no longer deserve our support.
No, REI does not get a pass because they have insurance. Did the courts find the insurance company at fault? NO - they found REI at fault.
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
The Illuminati -- S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Division
|
|
|
May 20, 2011 - 12:16am PT
|
I'm a little bothered that people are so quick to spew such venom at REI when their level of fault is unclear. It is clear, however, that the manufacturer
REI is the manufacturer. They held themselves out as making the bike. They did this using parts that they had build for their use. They selected the parts, the specs of the parts, and the suppliers for the parts.
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
The Illuminati -- S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Division
|
|
|
May 20, 2011 - 12:24am PT
|
I haven't read all of the posts, but from reading page one I'm a little bothered that people are so quick to spew such venom at REI when their level of fault is unclear. It is clear, however, that the manufacturer is to blame. I guess REI is an easy target because, for many here, all big corporations are evil. Seems like the venom should be more directed at the known bad guy. I see no reason to pass such judgment on REI from I've read so far.
This is funny, two courts have already passed judgment against REI. REI is trying to argue that the first two courts are wrong.
Also, don't blame the lawyers. Don't blame the insurance companies. Full responsibility for the decisions made by REI lies with the people in this picture.
The 2010 REI board of directors. Back row: left to right — Cheryl Scott, José Ignacio Lozano, Joanne Harrell, Brenda Davis, Anne Farrell, Charles Katz, Jr., Stephen Lockhart, Michael Smith. Front row: left to right — Jesse King, Sally Jewell, John Hamlin
REI is the nation's largest consumer cooperative with more than 4 million active members. A professional management team and staff operate REI, and a board of directors selected from REI's membership oversees the company.
|
|
Port
Trad climber
San Diego
|
|
|
May 20, 2011 - 12:26am PT
|
a board of directors selected from REI's membership oversees the company.
yea right!
|
|
Rankin
Social climber
Greensboro, North Carolina
|
|
|
May 20, 2011 - 12:30am PT
|
reddirt,
REI is strictly liable for the bike accident under Washington Products Liability Act, even though they did not manufacture the fork. The WLPA holds sellers responsible for manufacturing defects if their brand name is on it. That is not so much at issue in this case.
The trial court held for Johnson on her motion for summary judgment. REI appealed, requesting to join the actual manufacturer to the suit or to allow a jury to allocate damages between the two parties. The Ct. of App. affirmed, holding that the WLPA was intended to deny joint and several liability to sophisticated business parties like REI, since it is more than likely that REI has already allocated the risk of manufacturing defects by contract.
Washington is a comparative fault jurisdiction. Normally, REI's request would be granted, and the other manufacturer would be joined and liability would be apportioned by jury. However, the WLPA is an exception to the general rule of comparative fault in Washington. It was enacted to favor the quick and speedy resolutions for plaintiffs like Johnson, who I remind you, has won on summary judgment. It's not like her estate is not going to get paid. They will, and more than likely, with costs.
I'll be curious to see if the Supreme Court of WA will hear the case. Regardless, this is much more of a legal issue than a moral one. I'd suggest taking your moral outrage somewhere else, where you may have more of an understanding of what's going on.
There's much more to it than REI is evil, all corporations are evil. You make a childish strawman argument. And it begs the question, how many corporate products have you used today?
edit: By the way, when you win at summary judgment, the case doesn't go to a jury. So, in reality, they lost on summary judgment, lost on appeal to summary judgment, are now appealing again to the Supreme Court, who may or may not grant certiorari.
|
|
blahblah
Gym climber
Boulder
|
|
|
May 20, 2011 - 12:35am PT
|
No that was not excellent, you fools should get down on your hands and knees thanking the first lawyer that you see for protecting you from the ravages of large corporations and their insurance companies!
Poor Ms. Johnson (now her estate) would have got NOTHING from REI but for the effective assistance of her attorney, who was able to prevail over REI's evil insurance company (according you some of you--there's actually no evidence of any insurance company involvement, but why let facts intrude into your fantasies) at both the trial and appellate courts. Yes the attorney will take 40% of any recovery, but that's still far better than the goose egg she would have got without her lawyer!
And you would do well to keep in mind there has no been finding whatsoever that REI has been at "fault" for anything in this process. The case was decided under the doctrine of strict liability, which does not require a showing of "fault."
I think REI should pay for Ms. Johnson's injuries (in an amount to be determined at trial or as settled by the parties), and because of a (I am sure) hard-working, diligent attorney, that is what will happen.
How the f*#k much did any you blowhards do for Ms. Johnson?! Have fun getting drunk you drunk as#@&%e!
Edit--I hadn't read the above post when I posted--that's a good summary of the legal issue decided by the Washington Court of Appeals.
|
|
reddirt
climber
PNW
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 20, 2011 - 12:40am PT
|
Rankin, why personally attack me? why conflate the issue of REI dodging their responsibility as ruled by the court w/ other corporate issues?
rhetorical question... I don't actually care that you attack me personally, its just kinda curious thing to do.
|
|
atchafalaya
Boulder climber
|
|
|
May 20, 2011 - 12:42am PT
|
"This is funny, two courts have already passed judgment against REI. REI is trying to argue that the first two courts are wrong."
Should we do away with the Supreme Court of the US because two courts are enough? The argument that the bike accident may have impaired her judgment resulting in her death is even more bizarre. That evidence would be barred as too speculative.
The appeals may have worked to lower the damages if those have not yet been determined. The argument that she suffered brain damage from her five mile an hour accident is an argument to raise damages, and possibly ask a jury to award past and future wages, past and future medical bills, and past and future pain and suffering. This wasn't about $5000. Surely, her attorneys have invested tons of money into making this very profitable for them.
What I would like to know is if a settlement amount has been offered, but rejected as too low. What if she already passed on six figures? Her case doesn't have that value now. Was her deposition videotaped?
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
May 20, 2011 - 12:44am PT
|
There's much more to it than REI is evil, all corporations are evil. You make a childish strawman argument. And it begs the question, how many corporate products have you used today?
Show one place where Reddirt says "all" corporations are evil. Just one. That is your bias.
....
Blah blah.. So because REI has lawyers, we should bow down to all lawyers. hmmm. no thanks.
|
|
blahblah
Gym climber
Boulder
|
|
|
May 20, 2011 - 12:52am PT
|
John M--yes, there are lawyers on both sides, but it is solely the existence of the legal system that allows people like Ms. Johnson to recover anything from REI or other powerful entities.
Without a legal system, I suppose we would be in a world of caveat emptor and might-makes-right, and REI's got a whole lot more might than Ms. Johnson.
|
|
reddirt
climber
PNW
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 20, 2011 - 12:52am PT
|
The argument that the bike accident may have impaired her judgment resulting in her death is even more bizarre. That evidence would be barred as too speculative.
I'll totally grant that... I would never say "resulted"... more like "potentially contributed".
I've never condemned all corporations nor do I even condemn all manufacturing in in China. QA/QC Six sigma crapola determines manufacturing quality.
I do feel that it's important for entities & people live up to their word. And to not cause further damage by making unreasonable appeals just because they can.
|
|
Gene
climber
|
|
|
May 20, 2011 - 01:01am PT
|
What I would like to know is if a settlement amount has been offered, but rejected as too low. What if she already passed on six figures? Her case doesn't have that value now. Was her deposition videotaped?
Curious about this. Why doesn’t her case have that value now? Because she can’t testify? Or because of her early death? Or what?
The defective part was manufactured by a Taiwanese owned company, not a Chinese firm.
|
|
Srbphoto
climber
Kennewick wa
|
|
|
May 20, 2011 - 01:10am PT
|
For Locker:
let's say you use 5.10 Stealth glue (made by Sniffies Glues, but 5.10 says it is "theirs" on the label) for resoling. Since you don't have proper ventilation you generally get a nice buzz while "working". You get low and buy a new tube. You begin using the new tube and start really freaking out. 2 days later Cosmic comes by and finds you in a milk crate, crying. After testing the new tube you both figure out (3 days later) something is wrong.
Do you call 5.10 or Sniffies?
|
|
Rankin
Social climber
Greensboro, North Carolina
|
|
|
May 20, 2011 - 01:10am PT
|
reddirt, I don't intend a personal attack. I just call it like I see it. Sorry if you feel disrespected, but you're overly simplistic take on this case is childish. The appeal is about third party cross claims and joint and several liability under the WLPA. REI is not making much of an argument denying fault. They want the actual manufacturer to share in liability, and I don't blame them.
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
The Illuminati -- S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Division
|
|
|
May 20, 2011 - 01:14am PT
|
Should we do away with the Supreme Court of the US because two courts are enough?
Should we do away with the first amendment and prohibit people from voicing their own person opinions because there are courts?
Also, they aren't appealing to the Supreme Court of the US. They are appealing to the Washington (State) Supreme Court.
|
|
Port
Trad climber
San Diego
|
|
|
May 20, 2011 - 01:18am PT
|
I don't intend a personal attack but you're overly simplistic take on this case is childish
He didn't make a legal argument in the first place, which you seem intent on making. He's saying REI f*#ked over this girl, which they did. End of story. I don't intend a personal attack, but you sound like a jackass.
|
|
reddirt
climber
PNW
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 20, 2011 - 01:23am PT
|
they're fuking her over... twice... and they'll try a 3rd time if they can.
If REI wants to sell that fork as theirs, the onus is on REI to ensure the contractor manufactures the fork to spec.
REI could have cut their losses & just settle. They didn't.
Not sure how that's a jackass commentary.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!