The Utah Court of Appeals has given a Widow permission to proceed with a wrongful-death lawsuit against herself for alleged negligence in an automobile accident that killed her spouse. She is suing the person responsible for killing her husband in a car accident and that person just happens to be herself.
In December 2011, her husband died after she lost control of her vehicle in the Nevada desert. The vehicle flipped over after she hit a large sagebrush. Her husband was thrown from the vehicle and suffered severe injuries. He died a month later.
In her suit, she claims she was negligent for failing to control the car and should have notice the obstruction. She is both defendant and plaintiff in her lawuit. But the lawsuit is not as demented as it first appears. By suing the person responsible for her husband’s death, herself, she is actually meeting a legal responsibility to act on behalf of her husband’s estate.
She, as personal representative of the estate of her late husband, is suing driver which is herself, whose interests in the case are represented by her insurance carrier, according to the appeals court ruling. She seeks an unspecified amount of money for damages that include medical and funeral expenses; loss of past and future financial support; the physical pain her husband, he suffered before he died from his injuries; and the loss of his love and companionship.
Submitted By: jamminjim63 on March 3, 2015
We received a claim today for an auto accident/ liability claim from a Birthday party. Our insured is a limousine company. Their driver was found at fault when he slammed into a big rig truck when he exited the freeway to quickly.
The other bad news is that he had 18 “six year old” girls crammed into his limousine. Apparently the six year old was having a “Glamour Day” party. She had all of her friends dropped off at her house. They all jumped into the 10 passenger Limousine for a day of pampering. The first stop was a jumping play gym type of a place where they had pizza and soda and played on the equipment. They had all climbed back into the limousine and were heading to a nail salon to get mani’s and pedi’s and facials. According to the driver he was overwhelmed with all of the screaming and shrieking of the girls who were jumping everywhere in the back of the limousine. He was trying to yell at them to settle down at the same time he exited the freeway. He mis-judged the distance and slammed into the back of a big rig truck. The girls flew around the limo like popcorn and sustained numerous injuries. Several of the girls had to be transported to the hospital for treatment.
The parents of all 18 girls are filing claims for mental distress on top of the injuries. Their first issue is that the 10 passenger limo had 18 girls in it!!!!!!! I think we are on the hook for all of these claims as our driver was at fault and the limousine was Way beyond capacity. But, I also blame the parents of the birthday girl for being too cheap to rent two limos. However, our insured is definitely at fault for allowing this to happen and not standing by safety protocols and regulations.
Luckily none of these little girls were critically injured.
Submitted By: vixen in town on February 24, 2015
A homeowner sued a contractor for damage to her roof from winds that were only 25 mph. The entire roof came off because it was only attached by a handful of screws. The roof and a significant amount of household contents were damaged from rain. The contractor’s insurer paid the claim.
Submitted By: Crazy on February 24, 2015
We received a property damage claim for a woman who slammed her car into a Pizza Hut in New York after the chain reportedly lost her order. Police say she was upset the order she placed online was not there when she arrived at the store, so she decided to drive her car into the restaurant, cracking its glass doors.
Luckily, no employee were injured.
Submitted By: j lo on February 19, 2015
A federal jury ordered Toyota Motor Corp. to pay nearly $11 million to victims of a fatal Minnesota crash after ruling that a design flaw in the 1996 Camry was partially to blame for the 2006 wreck.
The jury said the company was 60 percent to blame for the accident, which left three people dead and two seriously injured. But jurors also decided that a driver, who has long insisted he tried to slow his car before it slammed into another vehicle after he exited Interstate 94 in St. Paul, was 40 percent to blame.
The plaintiff attorneys insisted the crash was caused by an acceleration defect in his vehicle, but Toyota argued there was no design defect and that the driver was negligent.
“No amount of money will bring my life back, my life is not the same anymore,” the driver said outside the courthouse. When asked what he would say to the family of the people killed in the crash, he said: “I want them to know that I tried everything I could to stop my car… I want them to know.”
After the 2006 wreck, the driver was charged and convicted of vehicular homicide, and sentenced to prison. But he won a new trial after reports surfaced about sudden acceleration in some Toyotas, and questions were raised about the adequacy of his defense. Prosecutors opted against a retrial and he went free after spending 2 years behind bars.
The driver and his relatives, along with other people who were injured or lost loved ones in the crash, later sued Toyota in U.S. District Court in Minneapolis. Jurors started deliberating five days before reaching a decision.
During the trial, the driver’s attorney told jurors that there was a defect in the car’s design. He said the Camry’s auto-drive assembly could stick, and when tapped or pushed while stuck, it could stick again at a higher speed. He also accused Toyota of never conducting reliability tests on nylon resin pulleys that could be damaged under heat and cause the throttle to stick.
“This is what makes the car go. This is what turns it into a torpedo, a missile, a deadly weapon,” the attorney stated during his closing argument.
Toyota said there was no defect in the design of the 1996 Camry, and that Lee was negligent. The company’s attorney for Toyota suggested the driver was an inexperienced driver and mistook the gas pedal for the brake, and that’s why the car accelerated.
Toyota also noted that the drivers car was never subject to the recalls of later-model Toyotas.
Jurors were asked to decide whether there was a defect in the design of the 1996 Camry that was unreasonably dangerous, and if so, whether that defect caused the plaintiffs’ injuries.
The crash killed the driver of the other vehicle and his 9-year-old son. His 6-year-old niece was paralyzed and died in October 2007. There were a few other injured plaintiffs in the case. But a large verdict to spread around.
Submitted By: Neil on February 19, 2015
An 84-year old man was just trying to cook shrimp for his 70-year-old girlfriend and a few friends during a dinner party when he accidentally burned down her house leaving four out of five of her pets dead. Apparently he was cooking shrimp outdoors, lit the fish cooker and went back inside the house to get the shrimp. He returned a few minutes later and realized both the cooker and the house were on fire. Efforts to put out the blaze failed and the home was basically destroyed.
A year later, having put the incident behind them, he received a letter telling him that his girlfriend was suing him. Only she wasn’t it was her insurance carrier who was subrogating against him. He was sued for $152,926 plus interest for damage to his girlfriend’s home from the fire as well as living expenses that were paid during the period the house was being repaired and she could not live there.
The couple are both in shock and now reside together in the repaired home. The girlfriend called the insurance company and they refuse to drop the lawsuit. Her boyfriends’ insurance is trying to defend him.
The insurance Carrier also raised her premium from $1,200.00 a year to $1,000.00 a month and now she cannot afford any coverage on her home.
Submitted By: claims buster on February 16, 2015
AS REPORTED ON AOL TODAY:
A little thing like distance wasn’t going to keep a miniature schnauzer named Sissy away from her owner.
On Saturday, Sissy escaped from her yard, walked the 20 blocks to Mercy Medical Center in Cedar Rapids, Iowa where her owner has been for the past two weeks, and strolled right through the front door and found her owner in her hospital room.
The Dog Owner has been recovering in the hospital after a cancer-related surgery. “She missed Mom. That’s all I can say: She missed Mom,” the daughter told KCRG.”That was great just being able to see her. That was perfect.”
We hear about pets going missing and then somehow traveling hundreds of miles to return to their families all the time. In 2013, a scientist told The Washington Post a dog’s sense of direction is tied to its sense of smell. Turns out, a dog’s sense of smell is 10,000 to 100,000 times more powerful than a human’s.
The dog owner’s family told KCRG while Sissy had never been to the hospital prior to Saturday, the dog owner works in a building next to the hospital, so it’s probable that Sissy followed her scent all the way there.
Submitted By: Burt on February 12, 2015
We received a psyche claim from an employee that has alleged that he has been verbally abused by his employer on an ongoing basis. He is claiming that he is unable to continue to work, needs DAILY psychological counseling, sleep deprivation treatment and treatment for erectile dysfunction. This all stems on the fact that he was given a verbal and written warning for his using a company vehicle daily to go to Burger King to pick up a Whopper!
Submitted By: betty on February 11, 2015
Enter to Win Crazy Gift Cards -- Up to $100.00! You would be Crazy not to submit your bizarro claims stories for the chance to win up to $100.00 in gift cards if your story is laugh out loud funniest, cringe-worthiest or craziest. Submit your Crazy claims today -- just make sure not to use any real names of people or companies. You could be a winner!