Boy, 8, sued in ski crash
Associated Press
Originally published 12:21 p.m., December 20, 2007
Updated 03:42 p.m., December 20, 2007
- Email this
- Print this
- Comments
- Change text size
- Subscribe to print edition
- iPod friendly
VAIL — A 60-year-old man is taking an 8-year-old boy and his dad to court, claiming the third-grader caused a ski-slope collision that left the older man with a shoulder injury.
David J. Pfahler of Allentown, Pa., filed suit in Denver federal court claiming Scott Swimm, of Vail, then 7, was skiing fast and recklessly when they ran into each other in January. Pfahler's suit says he suffered a torn shoulder tendon.
The boy told Pfahler he was sorry and started to ski away when the man grabbed Scott’s legs, cursed at him and said he would sue, Robb Swimm told The Aspen Times.
“I was really scared,” Scott said to the Times.
Scott's father, Robb Swimm, said he saw the crash and that Scott was skiing slowly and in control.
"It wasn't a violent collision or anything, Scott just kind of tapped his ski boots," he said this week.
Scott's mother, Susan Swimm, said her son weighs 48 pounds and couldn't have been going more than 10 mph.
"Who in the world sues a child?" she said. "It just boggles my mind every day." Pfahler's Denver attorney, Jim Chalat, declined to comment on the specifics of the case. "It's a private matter between private parties," he said.
Chalat said Pfahler works in publishing for Reader's Digest and wants to go back to work.
The suit seeks compensation for physical therapy, vacation time, nursing and medical services provided by Pfahler's wife and other expenses. It estimates the couple's losses at more than $75,000.
Clare Huntington, an associate professor at the University of Colorado School of Law, said Scott will likely be dismissed as a defendant under laws that allow parents to be sued but not their minor children.
December 20, 2007
1:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
aRe writes:
What does this guy think? - He's gonna ring this kid out of his Power Ranger collection.
Wow - another reason I don't ski.
December 20, 2007
1:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
Dan2 writes:
It would be nice if the RMN did a little bit more background into the circumstance of this accident. Did the boy or his family have their passes revoked (which must occur under Colorado law if a skier or rider is out of control and causes an "accident")? Was this reported to the ski patrol? Where did this accident occur? On the hill, in a lift line, at an intersection?
This guy can't to back to work because he has a torn shoulder tendon? I was back at work 4 days after having part of my knee cap removed. Maybe I'll request the suit, as it is part of open records if filed in federal court. I'll come back to this after reviewing the documents, and may even post a link.
Insane! I hope the judge dismisses this with prejudice.
December 20, 2007
2:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
Tree_Hugger writes:
David Pfahler obviously hasn't learned much in his 60 years on the planet.
The number one rule of skiing is to ski defensively.
The number two rule is: When you ski -- it is at your own risk.
Nobody made you take that chance. It was your own personal choice.
Thanks for coming her all the way from Pennsylvania so that you could show your ignorance and needlessly sue a child.
What do you hope to accomplish? Teach the kid a lesson? For what? Accidentally bumping into an old fossil on the bunny hill?
People like David Pfahler need to hang up their skis and stay off the slopes for good.
Sonny Bono's relatives didn't sue Lake Tahoe, California when he crashed into a tree and died. Similarly, Arnold Schwarzenegger didn't sue Sun Valley, Idaho when he broke his leg while skiing.
Perhaps ski resorts should start making people sign a waiver and purchase supplemental insurance when they buy their lift tickets.
Ridiculous.
December 20, 2007
2:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
horsinaround writes:
The man is an idiot for suing an 8 year old boy. I hope the old guy never graces Colorado's slopes with his presence again. Anybody ever hear the saying "accidents happen"? Maybe, just maybe if attorneys would quit being so money-hungry as to accept cases such as these, then we wouldn't have so many ridiculous lawsuits like this wasting our tax money!
December 20, 2007
3:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
Lacroix28 writes:
You have got to be kidding me. When is this madness going to stop? Accidents happen, especially on ski slopes. Pfahler works in publishing, and I highly doubt that he uses his shoulder edit/proofread manuscripts. This is so ridiculous; I cannot even comprehend what this gentleman is thinking. Hopefully the courts will dismiss this frivolous lawsuit and show that people really need to reconsider suing a 8 year old child for what apparently is an mishap.
December 20, 2007
3:22 p.m.
Theoldguy writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
December 20, 2007
3:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
Prism writes:
This is Ridiculous, another greedy person. Hey what do you expect
happens when you ski? You fall down sometimes you bump into people. Get off the slopes old man!! Next everyone will be signing a document before you can get on the slopes because of this idiot!
December 20, 2007
3:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
sirgrim writes:
I thought a lawyer had to provide notice of intent to sue, to be all formal. If this guy started shouting that he's going to sue while the kid is trying to apologize, doesn't that amount to extortion? I'm no lawyer, but it seems like there are certain procedures to follow.
December 20, 2007
4:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
Dan2 writes:
I looked up the docket for this suit, it was filed Sept. 6th in Federal Court. Here is what I found:
"On Friday, January 12, 2007, the plaintiff, David J. Pfahler, and the defendant, Scott
Swimm, were both skiing at Beaver Creek Ski Resort in Colorado on a trail named
Golden Bear near the base of the mountain.
6. Both Mr. Pfahler and Mr. Scott Swimm were “skiers” pursuant to the Colorado Ski
Safety Act. C.R.S. § 33-44-103(8).
7. Mr. Pfahler was skiing at a slow pace ahead (downhill) of the defendant. Mr.
Pfahler was plainly and readily visible, maintaining a proper lookout, skiing slowly
and in control.
8. Defendant Swimm was skiing negligently and recklessly, at a high rate of speed.
He collided into Mr. Pfahler causing him to be injured.
9. The sole proximate cause of the collision was the negligent manner in which the
defendant was skiing."
"The collision caused Mr. Pfahler to suffer a massive anterior rotator cuff tear,
requiring right shoulder arthroscopy with subacromial decompression with release
of coracoacromial ligament, distal clavicle resection and debridement of labral
tearing, labral tearing and chondroplasty, and open repair of massive rotator cuff.
18. He has had to engage in an extensive and continuous course of physical therapy."
The good thing is in the response, the defendants are claiming this as frivolous and demanding a jury trial. Basically, they are saying the kid, all 48 lbs of him, knocked the old guy over, which tore his rotator cuff (hard to believe), and since this old guy is not a major league pitcher, but an employee for Readers Digest, it is very hard to fathom how what amounts to 18 sessions of PT, will have a long term negative impact on his ability to due his job...
December 20, 2007
4:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
smith writes:
You know what the world needs... more lawyers :)
December 20, 2007
5:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
American100 writes:
Nasty Old Bastard
December 20, 2007
6:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
PMSXpress writes:
Oh fer chrissake. The guy has got dollar signs for brains and not much else. The gist here is the codger learned the kid lives in Vail and smells easy early-retirement money. It is probably pretty boring working at Reader's Digest, judging by the pedestrian content of the stories in it. Yawn.
The comment Pfahler made about suing - while swearing at a little kid, which says volumes about his personality right there - and grabbing the child's leg - which amounts to an assault - hopefully will be sufficient grounds to throw the suit out. I sat on a jury a few years back where we listened to a similar frivolous trial where the "victim" had threatened a lawsuit (in front of witnesses) immediately at the scene of a very minor car accident. But the plaintiff didn't put his hands on the defendant either, so Pfahler really did something pretty stupid. His lawyer is probably hoping to get a settlement from the insurance company of the kid's parents, because he knows this won't fly in front of a jury of his peers if it even makes it that far. Anyway, our jury was unanimous and it only took us about 20 minutes to deliberate. The plaintiff walked away with zilch and his tail firmly tucked between his legs.
So Pfahler, if you're reading this from Allentown, go find someone your own size (and maybe several decades closer to your own age) to pick on. Little kid, geezus. You knew the risks when you stepped into the bindings. It isn't like the kid bumped you with intent to injure you. The only intent here is that you just want to retire early.
Golden Bear is a pretty easy intermediate run, so if the old fart was skiing on it, he wouldn't have been a rank newbie (maybe). He was probably just ripe for a fight. One thing's for sure, if he'd have grabbed my kid and swore at him, he would have had more to worry about than just a torn rotator cuff.
Geeez, people sure suck, don't they?
December 20, 2007
6:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
sprintmarathon writes:
So if the the guy was skiing down hill and the kid came from behind, how would this frail old coot be able to describe the child's manner of skiing before the impact? If he never saw it coming, there would be no way of knowing when the boy was out of control.
December 20, 2007
6:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
JustSomeDude writes:
As a native of northeastern PA, I'm embarrased this lawsuit has even seen the light of day. Mr. Pfahler, you are a pathetic man if you find it necessary to file lawsuits against 7 year olds.
Go back to PA, jackass!
December 20, 2007
6:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
PMSXpress writes:
sprint, he made a right turn into the kid as the kid was passing him on that same side. If you ski, you see it happen ALL the time. And you made an excellent point. Maybe the old fart has eyes in the back of his head (like my mother used to claim she had) ;-)
December 20, 2007
7:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
mguydish writes:
You all know what you're thinking: " This society is going to snap sometime. "
You all know what you'd really like to say: "This society needs a revolution to snap us back to reality and loving common sense".
Arm yourself and put these people in their place again. Lawsuit happy society must get revolutionized!
If you think *I'm* nuts, think about this story and others that make it this way.
The lawyers are not helping nor are on the right side, but they were the last line of defense to the final change.
It's going to get worse before it gets better. Where will it end?
*** What are you going to do about it and at what point?
It's coming folks, so get ready!
Also remember, this has nothing to do about hating your country or government, or taking it over, it's about you and us making it the way it was and the way it is supposed to be: with conscientious, respectful, and loving fellow men and women to each other.
We are all too busy to prevent what is coming. I too, am guilty.
Hide and watch!
December 20, 2007
7:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
fortyfive writes:
im with the old fart, sue his butt to hell and when you get everything take it and go play in the sand box with his gijoes and enjoy your 3rd childhood because you are now awarded the darwen award for you letting your 2 brain cells talk to each other, this is what happens when the cage door is left open by mistake, anything can get loose .................... to the little kid if in event you have to give up your gi joes to this old fart i would like to suggest one thing........piss on them 1st and i will personally replace them with some marine gi joes.
December 20, 2007
8:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
peaked writes:
It is tragic that this guy works for Reader's Digest which is a champion on reporting on frivolous lawsuits and are against them. Maybe we should all E-mail Reader's Digest and tell them on their next issue to print and report about this one. I for one, will never read Reader's Digest again if this poor boy or his family is sued. Skiing is at own risk. This is a sad reflection on Reader's Digest for employing this guy!
December 20, 2007
9:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
Barney writes:
This jerk can congratulate himself as his story is nearly guaranteed to make national news due to it being so outrageous. This story is bad for the ski industry and Colorado's economy. Thanks jerkweed.
December 20, 2007
9:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
Western_Sky writes:
peaked, what a great idea! I just emailed Michael Crowley a columnist at Readers Digest, cut and pasted the RMN story with a few thoughts about what sort of individual would be swearing at a young child, grabbing him and making threats of suing? This person is obviously looking for an easier passport to a more comfortable life and, if you read it carefully so is his wife... suing for medical services rendered by his wife?! What happened to "in sickness and in health?!" ROTFLMAO. He'll get an insurance settlement, even though it is obvious what he is up to.
Michael Crowley = outrageous@rd.com
Editors dialog email interface is = http://www.rd.com/talktous.do?&li...
December 20, 2007
10:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
peaked writes:
Thanks Western. I emailed the editors at RD after I saw this article and posted. I hope they will respond. Also, I hope they get this guy for assualt on son for grabbing him. It will be interesting how this plays out
December 20, 2007
11:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
discdog writes:
Wow, these comments shock me. The guy isn't suing for millions, he is suing for $75k. Shoulder surgery + PT + lost time at work + a bit of pain and suffering easily equals $75000. This is a very reasonable amount.
More importantly, here is an paraphrased excerpt from the Colorado Skier Safety Act of 1979:
If you are involved in a collision with another skier that results in injury, it is unlawful for you to leave the vicinity of the collision before you have left your name and current address with a member of the Steamboat Ski Patrol.
It mostly certainly was not assault when he prevented the child from unlawfully leaving the area. Further, as for cursing at the child, I think we all experienced pain that made us less polite than we might be. This is not a shoulder tweak; his surgery procedure list suggests a dramatic shoulder injury. For those who suggest a 50 lb child couldn't do any damage, consider that the speed of the child matters as much as his weight. Last, for those who suggested he can work, consider that he would be unable to use a keyboard, to write with that hand, to lift any objects of any weight, and probably would be on considerable pain killers. I would expect him to lose a couple weeks of work at a minimum.
If you ski, and I do, you know that not all parents are very responsible about ensuring their children behave responsibly. Where are the admonitions for the parent who failed to teach their child the legal responsibilities of all skiers in Colorado, let alone good manners?
December 21, 2007
12:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
mark_yy_mark writes:
Looks like the story just broke in Allentown PA, and his neighbors are starting to weigh in:
http://www.mcall.com/news/local/all-l...
December 21, 2007
1:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
cpeterson writes:
Thank you Western_Sky for posting the link. http://www.rd.com/talktous.do?&li....
The following is the posting I left for their editors.
I am appalled that your fine company would be associated with someone as repulsive as David J. Pfahler of Allentown who is unbelievably suing an 8 year-old boy from our state over a skiing accident.
This is legal opportunism at it worst and directly conflicts with the values espoused by your fine publication over many decades.
Please, in all haste, disassociate yourself from this wretched creature.
As I'm sure you know from the volume of communications you are receiving, the people of Colorado will stand with you in supporting his immediate dismissal with cause for embarassing your company.
December 21, 2007
7:01 a.m.
Map writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
December 21, 2007
8:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
mguydish writes:
PearlGirl : Would love to hear your comments. Send them to me using the following email address: mguydish2@yahoo.com. If not too bad, I might create a posting site for it.
December 21, 2007
8:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
jrthekid writes:
to site admin:
Please stop removing the comments. It's very annoying. Try updating your site to hide/show comments you deem inappropriate.
December 21, 2007
8:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
Western_Sky writes:
Sure discdog,
Except that this a-hole had already threatened to sue ON THE SPOT, right when it happened. Whether he knew he would be losing sick time and paying for surgery would have unknown at the time. So he was already intending to do so. Which in my book makes him lower than whale crap in the Mariana Trench. Based on Pfahler's preempted statement, I would not be at all surprised that he is lying about the kid skiing recklessly. Geez, you make it sound like the little kid was out to intentionally hurt somebody. The truth is that it is the other way around.
I don't think it behooves a parent to teach a young child they any mistake they might make will result in a lawsuit, so be sure not to goof up - ever. That's ridiculous. This was an unfortunate and unplanned ACCIDENT. And I cannot believe that Reader's Digest does not offer health insurance coverage. And why does his wife have to collect? A torn shoulder tendon does not require specialized, round the clock care. These people come from an economically depressed area of Pennsylvania and are looking for a free ride here. Probably have some credit card bills for the vacation trip to Colorado to pay off. Hey, why not get the people who pay insurance premiums to foot the bill?
So discdog, best be minding your Ps & Qs bud, because someone will come after you too no matter if how minor some incident could be. Hopefully your dog won't destroy someone else's disc or somethin' ya know?
December 21, 2007
10:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
jdstanley writes:
WOW I can’t believe all the negative comments here. Hey! The next time someone busts up your body and costs you $75,000 let’s see how happy you are about it. I don’t care if it’s a 8-year old child or not – the kid caused an accident that resulted is injury to someone else and significant financial loss.
For the sake of argument let’s turn the accident on its head. Who here doesn’t believe the child’s parents would not sue this man if he had caused the injury to the child and the financial loss to the parents?
Next time think it through before you decide to write HATE comments.
As for the people that are sending hate mail to Readers Digest trying to get him fired ... You are opening yourself wide open for a nice lawsuit yourself. I can imagine the damages against you being far greater than $75,000.
December 21, 2007
10:31 a.m.
shammydog writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
December 21, 2007
10:32 a.m.
Suggest removal
bobbyb writes:
If you don't want to get hurt stay the hell home. Everytime you get on a ski run you risk injury. Don't go blaming a little boy for it. What a loser.
December 21, 2007
10:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
rjames writes:
Wow, lighten up on the old guy! As much as I hate frivolous lawsuits, this one seems like it could have merit. Presumably, the guy is suing the kid because his parents will have to pay. Also, IF the kid was skiing out of control, 48 pounds is plenty to cause someone to fall in a collision and get injured. Finally, as someone who just went through months of therapy for a shoulder problem, the amount of therapy doesn't seem unreasonable to me. This is one a jury should decide.
December 21, 2007
10:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
Swut writes:
I wouldn't worry too much about sending letters to readers digest. If you are simply expressing an opinion (not threatening him), you're protected by the First Amendment. I intend to comment that, "if the story is true, Reader's Digest should not continue to employ Mr. Pfahler because he does not have the common sense and judgment that one would expect for an employee of such an esteemed periodical. His exploits are more appropriate for articles on "Life in these united states" or "Frivolous Lawsuits."
December 21, 2007
10:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
nxrble writes:
What I wrote:
Regarding David J. Pfahler, one of your employees in the state of Pennsylvania:
Filing a lawsuit against an eight year-old, regardless of the matter that brought it, raises an eyebrow immediately. Filing it in the aftermath of a skiing "incident", where you are reported to have said "I'm going to sue!" is repulsive.
Skiing is an at-risk sport. To have one of your own staff involved in a matter your publication has reported on in similar, frivilous, lawsuits, I suppose was bound to happen. He took a risk, got injured, and instead of having that inner guidance most of us have that things can and will happen that are not under our control, he has decided to sue a little boy and his family rather than accept that responsibility on his own.
Please look into this, and I would appreciate an ackowledgement on the matter.
Respectfully,
Me
December 21, 2007
10:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
TheProudDuck writes:
I'd encourage the boy's parents to file a counterclaim for intentional infliction of emotional distress (based on the man's bullying of a 7-year-old, cursing, etc.) assault and battery (based on the dork's grabbing the boy's leg), false imprisonment (I don't believe the "leaving the scene of a ski accident" statute is an offense that privileges a private citizen to physically restrain an alleged offender), and anything else a creative lawyer ought to be able to think up. He's asking $75,000? Demand $150,000, plus punitive damages. Nothing says "Merry Christmas" like a nice countersuit.
December 21, 2007
10:49 a.m.
Suggest removal
kunanibeach writes:
If everyone who was injured on the slopes sued the person they thought could have been responsible, the swamp of frivilous and meaningless lawsuits would be overwhelming? Worried about injuring that 60-year old body? Then you shouldn't be skiing. Kid (and adult) collisions happen on the slopes everyday, yet responsible folks equate these mishaps to the phrase "accidents". There was no intent to harm here...accident is the only appropriate term.
Turn the argument on its head, jdstanley. If someone accidentally tripped over your feet at a roller rink and sued you for $75,000, I'm glad you would happily fork over the money. But I prefer to think that Americans need not sue for every accident that comes our way. Life is not to be lived from lawsuit to lawsuit. Like spilled coffee and lost pants at the dry cleaners, it's a part of life, and should be left at that. There are surely greater tragedies in life.
December 21, 2007
10:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
Minxey writes:
Ok, I think this guy is out of line. He should have filed against the parents as the child is a minor.....and his attorney is a doofus for doing it. I also find it interesting that the attorney isn't making any comments about it, that speaks volumes to me. When is it that an attorney keeps their mouth shut without a judge's order??
Now, I've had a shoulder injury that required surgery. Trust me, it sucks. However, the suit stated that he had a subacromial decompression, which is what I had. My understanding in my case was that I first hurt my shoulder and the build up of scar tissue on my tendons/ligaments made the space in the joint too small, so they cut out some of the bone. After I recovered, I had many PT sessions, it takes quite a bit of work to get the shoulder working again, so that isn't out of line.
I think this man would have hurt himself whether the kid bumped him or not. He fell badly to do this damage. Also, who would expect a 7yo to know that he must stay at the accident site to report to the Ski Patrol? He bumped the man,apologized and he's on his way. Also, it was assault to grab the kid, and the father was right behind his son, he would have tracked the kid down for the report.
December 21, 2007
10:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
Gilbert writes:
This article doesn't state the "injury" to the man's shoulder, what was it?
"The suit seeks compensation for physical therapy, vacation time, nursing and medical services provided by Pfahler's wife and other expenses. It estimates the couple's losses at more than $75,000."
Come on, who would sue for vacation time and services provided by ones wife. How did they come up with this total?
Sounds like a modern day Scrooge
December 21, 2007
10:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
Rich writes:
C'mon folks. You automatically believe the boy's version and discount the man's?!? I wanted to learn to ski. As a beginner, as we are all at some time, I was extra careful, but was continually harassed by youngsters zipping around---yeah, 50 pounds can indeed go pretty fast--and was in fact knocked down by a young lady on a snow board. At 56 I was banged up and was pretty sore, more so than a younger person would have been I'm sure.
No we absolutely shouldn't sue every time something happens to us. There are true accidents. But to just believe one version of something without any cooroboration is irresponsible at best. And to publish this man's address and phone number is vile.
December 21, 2007
10:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
Stewpified writes:
A lot of you folks don't seem to realize the uphill skier is responsible for controlling his actions. Fast or slow, the kid skied into Pfahler, injured him, and cost him $$.
The kid's parents are responsible and should pay. If little Scotty can't control himself, he shouldn't be on the slope. End of story.
Pfahler is completely justified in his actions.
December 21, 2007
10:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
UNCLEMEATBALL writes:
I am from Allentown, Pa and would like to let all of you know that we do not condone what this old fart is doing. This guy does not in any way, shape or form have the support of anyone here. I am ashamed to live in the same town as this clown. To the father of the 8 year old, please know that everyone in Allentown, Pa and surrounding area's (with the exception of the Pfahler family) is rooting for you.
December 21, 2007
10:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
photopo writes:
This man makes me embarassed to say that I am from Pennsylvania :(! It's ashame that there are no longer accidents, because you no longer get into an accident, you get into a lawsuit! Pretty soon the conversation will be "How was your day honey? Not bad, had a near lawsuit on may way into work this morning".
December 21, 2007
11:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
niceskiswannahuck writes:
What I really want to know is what kind of skis this little kid was rippn on. If he's one of these little creatures that run around with mp3 going and riding switch..Id kick his arse too. If he was under control and skiing like a resort skier (compared to xgames) then Im on his side...but it seems that there is going to be a he said she said side to everything. Also, when did patrol show up. It is the responsibilty of BOTH parties to stay at the scene of an accident. Any skier should know that...
December 21, 2007
11:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
niceskiswannahuck writes:
And the cursing?...please kids curse all day playing XBOX 360's Halo3 online, give me a break. And if you're wondering...yes I curse back, :-)
December 21, 2007
11:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
jeffhos writes:
"'The boy told Pfahler he was sorry and started to ski away when the man grabbed Scott’s legs, cursed at him and said he would sue,' Robb Swimm told The Aspen Times."
Sounds like a counter-claim cause of action for the boy against the old man for battery and assault on a minor. Possible criminal charges? Maybe the old man will end up paying for the kid's college tuition.
December 21, 2007
11:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
WillS writes:
My one experience with skiing was accompanying a group of scouts, many of whom, like me were first timers. I picked it up quickly and we all had a great time, but I almost fell a few times when teenagers overtook me at very high speed, passing within inches. In every case, they were on snowboards, apparently going for some speed record. This happened at least once every run. I had fun, but it wasn't worth the risk of injury, since there was apparently no one taking responsibility. Had I been hurt because of this, I would not feel it was entirely "my own fault" simply because I chose to ski. There are accidents and then there are accidents.
I don't know the details of this case, of course, but there are clearly two sides.
Publishing the man's home address, while hiding behind the skirts of anonymity, is a cowardly act.
December 21, 2007
11:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
niceskiswannahuck writes:
I agree WillS...posting the address is THE most IMMATURE act of the whole story.
December 21, 2007
11:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
PMSXpress writes:
Rich at 10:53 - I do believe the kid and his father's story because the "victim" was already crying lawsuit, before he even got his arse up off the snow. Before he had any idea if he was really injured or not and what the long-term implications of his fall were going to be. So his intentions were very clear from the beginning. And that's what I have the problem with. I posted earlier that I sat on a jury involving a case that was similar to the behavior of Mr. Pfahler's and we didn't award him a dime. Frankly I was surprised it even made it to a trial, but the defendent's insurance company was really fighting it apparently. It also involved an ambulance-chasing lawyer who trolls for victims on daytime TV.
Yup, stuff happens on ski slopes all winter long. When you were knocked down (and sorry that happened to you, hope you've recovered) were the first words (other than swearing) out of your mouth, "I'm gonna sue!" ??? And did you? Did you take a breath for a minute and sort through your thoughts before hollering about being a victim? We all have to assume reasonable liability as skiing definitely exposes one to many risks.
Your argument would make more sense if the child had indeed been reckless and dangerous (I've seen them out there too). Why didn't the ski patrol revoke the boy's pass and escort him off the mountain as they do when someone is skiing out of control and a danger to those around him? That right there would've supported the claim but it never happened. Because Mr. Pfahler is lying, that's why. Those close to the situation at the time, including resort officials that arrived at the scene were aware of it.
I do agree though that the man's contact information should not be exposed, that is harsh.
December 21, 2007
11:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
HPmatt writes:
If I was skiing at Beaver Creek, and had a 48# bullet rip my shoulder apart, I'd cuss too. I would hold on to the kid and get information from him on how to sue - to pay my Dr bills, to pay me for lost earnings for time off from my job to recover, to pay for therapy to get full use (hopefully) of my shoulder. I do not believe the parents - saying the kid was going 10 miles an hour and just 'tapped ski boots' - probably blew this guy off his feet.
Did I hear the kids' parents offered to pay this guy's medical bills? (Bloggers - what is their mailing address? where does the lying mom/dad work?) I don't think you can get up the lift with a hurt shoulder if you are looking for someone to pay for a 'pre-existing shoulder condition'.
Way to go Pfahler!!! I'll send you a Get Well card and $20 to help defray bills from 'minding your own business in accordance with CO law'.
December 21, 2007
11:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
Senji writes:
Did this guy forget to read the back of EVERY LIFT PASS that is given out at EVERY ski resort?
dumb jackass.
December 21, 2007
11:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
DNABIT writes:
Not sure what to say. I am not a skier. Not an 8 year old kid, either. But, I think if I were an 8 year old kid skiing and bumped into some old person who started grabbing at me as I apologized and then threatening to sue, I think I would boogey out of there. What are my options? Stick around and get hit? No thanks!
I remember being on the New Smyrna Beach in Florida at the age of 16. This old burly guy got in his car and started chasing us. Trying to insult us or whatever, so we escaped. The old guy finally caught up to us, said what he had to say, and went back to the beach. We did not do anything to him and did not provoke him. We did tell him to drive his car on the beach when the tide was coming in would result in him getting his car stuck.
He drove back on the beach. About an hour later, the tide came up and his car got stuck. Tow truck gets a fee and the car gets a salt water bath.
I certainly wasn't going to stick around and find out what this guy's problem was. His car getting a salt water bath and his having to pay the tow truck fee certainly did not make his day any better.
What would you expect from an 8 year old kid on a snow slope?
December 21, 2007
11:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
evalynx writes:
To JDSTANLEY...
Threatening to sue posters... for expressing their opinion to Reader's Digest... Oh, that's rich! What a dope! It's called Freedom of Speech dummy. You must be an attorney yourself. As was another poster who suggested $75K was chump change for such a lawsuit. Everyone should remember, whenever a lawyer or other legal slimeball says how cheap a lawsuit is... the lawyer's fees are part of that lawsuit... usually to the tune of 33%. I'm sure the injured party's insurance must have paid for his medical bills... so how else do you crank it up to a mere $75K.
Considering Reader's Digest DOES shine a light on just such stories... I say it's our duty to let them know about this one.
December 21, 2007
11:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Phil writes:
Everyone who is saying "he spent $75000!"--do you realize what the article said. The nursing and medical expenses were performed BY HIS WIFE!!! Smells like a scam to me.
"I don't think you can get up the lift with a hurt shoulder if you are looking for someone to pay for a 'pre-existing shoulder condition'." You can easily get on a ski lift with a pre-existing hurt shoulder. Athletes play games with injuries all the time, you don't think a person can put on a coat and get on a ski lift with a hurt shoulder?
Accidents happen all the time on ski slopes. I've never heard anybody yell "I'm gonna sue you!" That is another piece of evidence that leads me to believe that he was already hurt and is looking for someone else to pay his wife for his services.
"As for the people that are sending hate mail to Readers Digest trying to get him fired ... You are opening yourself wide open for a nice lawsuit yourself. I can imagine the damages against you being far greater than $75,000."
Since when is it against the law to request someone get fired? Guess what--it isn't.
December 21, 2007
11:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
niceskiswannahuck writes:
I think Ill get a graphic on the back my helmet that says "hit me and I'll sue"...lmao
December 21, 2007
11:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
BinSC writes:
Interesting that everyone immediately takes the boy/father's account of the incident, not that they would have incentive ($75K) to lie. Anyone who ski's knows that one of the biggest hazards on the slopes is unsupervised kids that are reckless and don't care who they injure or offend. I'm shocked the dad didn't say his son was flying down, out of control, crashed into the man, and then said "screw you". Don'
t know that is what happened, but my point is that nobody knows what happened but the parties involved. As far as returning to work, many have said it is ridiculous that he can't go back. Hmmmmm, most of you probably haven't had a shoulder injury. I have had two. After one I was able to return, the other took awhile. The difference? After the second one, the computer age had evolved and there is nothing like trying to use a computer after having an arm or shoulder injury. Physical work is easier on the joint. Get a grip and don't be so quick to take the father/son side. The old man knows he isn't really suing the kid. He just named him in the suit because he was the cause of the accident.
December 21, 2007
11:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
Tarfu writes:
I am also surprised at all the hate comments toward the old man. I don't know how all you people can just automatically support the young boy. You are believing everything that the boy's father said gospel. The father said the old man said he was going to sue. Were there any witnesses to this? If the father was right there, why did the boy start to leave and dad not tell him he had to stay there until the patrol came? Alot of parents say that their little Johnny would never do that bad thing or misbehave. That's what Jamie Lynn Spears' mom thought too but her 16 year old still got in trouble.
Let a judge or jury decide, but I wonder with all the hate comments if the old man could even get a fair trial in CO at this point.
December 21, 2007
11:52 a.m.
exskiking writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
December 21, 2007
11:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
s4tomh writes:
So, folks, consider this scenario: old guy injures himself -- on the slopes, at home slipping on some ice, who knows?-- but has nobody to blame, so he trolls the slopes looking for somebody to run into him. The only victim he is quick enough to collide with is the little kid. Bang. Fall down. Claim the injury happened right then and there, and who's to know? It's not as if he couldn't have functioned at all with the injury.
December 21, 2007
12:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
MensRea writes:
Just a quick comment about the amount sought by Pfahler. The RMN reported that it is in excess of $75,000 only because that is the minimum amount that must be sought for the federal court to have jurisdiction over this case. If Pfahler sought 70k, he'd have to sue in state court.
In actuality here, Pfahler could be seeking WELL MORE than 75k. For all we know from the article he could be seeking $500,000+ (compensatory + punitive).
December 21, 2007
12:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
evalynx writes:
In these internet and blog driven times, the "community" we live in has been vastly increased. Information, in particular the outrageous, travels in the amount of time it takes to hit "send." And as outrageous behavior such as this becomes almost the norm, and when the media is more interested in making the news than reporting it, when our elected officials ARE NOT smarter than a 5th grader... sooner or later... the community... the web community... will serve up what they decide is justice. Outrageous behavior ... begets... an outrageous response. Perhaps it will be the only thing that serves as any kind of warning to those who are dishonest and corrupt. In that, the internet may find it's greatest purpose. While most people avoid jury duty... on the net people are nearly compelled ... to set things right. And in those instances, where a poster truly crosses a line... the web community, which can quickly gather THE FACTS, will set them straight too. One thing for certain, no slick, fast-talking attorney will pull the wool over the eyes of any cyber jury. Here, the facts, past and present, will come to light, and the truth, as it is found, and the justice of the net community will be served.
December 21, 2007
12:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
LS writes:
HPMatt, that's assuming it really was a 48 lb. "bullet" as you put it. And you'd be grabbing onto someone, even though your shoulder was so badly injured that it would prevent you from returning to work after several months? Can you say Golden Parachute?
December 21, 2007
12:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
reader37 writes:
Another DA lawyer. He is the one pushing for this suit, along with a greedy old fart. The kid should sue him for assult. Hope the judge is smarter than most, and kicks the old fart and his lawyer to the curb.
December 21, 2007
12:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
gnarschrapler writes:
discdog, jdstanley, et al,
I tore my rotator cuff along with every other tendon in my shoulder and did not have to get simple arthroscopic surgery, I had to get full blown reconstruction and I was only out of school for 1 week, and that was ten years ago. I know surgery has improved since then. It is painful, but as a 18 year girl I didn't throw a fit or swear at the person who caused it (an opposing soccer player). I never even considered suing them. Skiing is a sport, just like soccer, and you participate at your own risk. What a wimpy man! STAY OFF THE MOUNTAIN!
December 21, 2007
12:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
Got_Duff writes:
I think everyone should calm down and realize all we have here is hearsay on both sides. Some of you sound like parents when their little precious Jimmy gets in a situation and comes home to Mommy and Daddy with a tale of how it's not his fault and the other person is out to get him and the parents immediately take little Jimmy's side without fully knowing the situation. None of us were there.
Many people are basing their opinion on the idea that this man immediately cried lawsuit. That is what the father is claiming.... why I can't say. It could have really happened that way or the father could realize that he is going to be financially liable and no better way to get out of it than paint the man as suit happy. He could be trying to cover for his own neglagance for not properly supervising his kid. We don't know that is my whole point.
Under what circumstances is the old man justified?
if the kid was out of control or obviously skiing recklessly while his parents skied behind and watched than than he is.
Under what circumstances is this BS?
If the kid was only traveling slowly and the accident was not because of a apparent diregard for others safety then yes it is BS.
Which ever side can produce an unbiased witness should win.
According to some of your logic, if I'm driving my car and hit somebody, whether I was doing it recklessly or I just made a mistake but it was my fault, I should be able to tell the other person I am not paying crap because you know people get in car accidents everyday and it is just a risk you run when you decide to drive a car.
I for one am reserving judgement until further information is provided.
And for those posting addresses and phone numbers that is C.S.
December 21, 2007
12:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
DoubleD writes:
So I tried to give our hero a call. Ironically he's not answering the phone. I wasn't going to talk anyway, but the funny thing was the voice mail: "Thank you for calling the HOME AND OFFICE of ...." This guy works from home for Reader's Digest and his wife cared for him! I'm real curious as to if he submitted any correspondence to Reader's Digest during his down time. If he used old writings I can understand, but then again he wouldn't have had any lost wages now would he?
December 21, 2007
12:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
DavefromPA writes:
This guy is not the norm, but the exception, so lets lay of Pennsylvania a little. I'm a ski instructor born and raised in Pennsylvania and I agree almost completely with what most people have posted here. First off this lawsuit is without merit and a waste of tax payers money. By all accounts in every state skiing is done at ones own risk. If he couldn't take a collision with a 48 pound child he shouldn't have been skiing in the first palce, much less out west where it is harder than here on the east coast. The only thing that should have happened here is that the ski patrol should have talked to the child and if he was out of control maybe revoked his lift pass for the day. Although most of the time ski patrol and instructors will opt to work with younger kids for free and help them with technique and etiquette, rather than ruin a childs day and love for the sport. As a Pennsylvanian I offer my appologies to Scott Swimm and Colorado skiers in general, this guy should have never been on your slopes. DL
December 21, 2007
12:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
bobbyb writes:
HPMatt-- you're what's wrong with America today.
Anyone think that Pfahler's lawyer is running up billable hours by posting on here?
Hey Pfahler-- be a man and quit blaming an 8 year old kid for your problems.
December 21, 2007
12:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
evalynx writes:
And why do some of you assume it is not so... and readily side with the plaintiff. Of course, we want all the facts. So, YOU shouldn't assume the kid and father are naturally lying.
Attorneys take great pride in being able to argue either side of a case... equally well. Yet, they really can't take the heat and the general hostility that the public has for them... as a result of their less than moral attitudes and conduct, and the ability they have honed at smelling blood from across the country, across the world... well, no one cares much for vultures.
The mere fact that attorneys are involved... raises most everyone hackles and opens the door for contempt.
December 21, 2007
1:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
MikeinMD writes:
This clown is employed by Reader's Digest, which has a feature called "That's Outrageous!". I don't know about everyone else, but I think this MO-ron is a prime candidate for inclusion in the next edition!
December 21, 2007
1:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
evalynx writes:
So "Got_Duff" what are you ... a lawyer in chicken feathers?
What's C.S.? Civil Suit?
I hardly think so. The phone numbers and address are in the public domain.... public information. Now, it's possible there could be civil action involved if people were to call someone and are vile or vulgar or threatening (and if they can be traced). But to post an address or phone number that are public... no indeedy. If it were grounds for a suit... I hardly think the rockymountainnews would post it... and risk being a party in the suit.
Nice try with the scare tactics. People can write or e-mail or call. They should be cautious in what they say and how they say it.
December 21, 2007
1:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
evalynx writes:
Exactly right "MikeinMD," and the e-mail for sending outrageous stories to Reader's Digest was given earlier in the postings, it is:
outrageous@rd.com
December 21, 2007
1:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
princeofwaldo writes:
What a 60 year-old moron, and that's putting it mildly. I propose we set-up a website to collect donations so we can send this jerk on a hunting trip with Dick Cheney.
December 21, 2007
1:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
STUMACK writes:
Sue your parents Mr. P - they named you Mr. Pfahler (Faller)
December 21, 2007
1:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
piperdoc writes:
As a physician, it is obvious to me that Mr Pfahler already had a significantly degenerated shoulder condition which resulted in his "massive anterior rotator cuff tear" weh he fell. His rotator cuff tear only occurred because of his pre-existing acromioclavicular arthritis (resulting in the need to remove a portion of his clavicle) and coraco-acromial arthritis (this coracromial ligament was shaved during the surgery), thus when he fell, these arthritic structures tore his rotator cuff. He could have fallen anywhere and has this result (even on the next ski run), or even forcefully lift his arm over his head and had this result.
Despite all of that, to be suing a child for this is utterly pathetic. Suing anyone for daily risks that we take, and something occurs is additionally pathetic. Only in America.
December 21, 2007
1:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
evalynx writes:
And... if you want to exercise your Freedom of Speech and comment to his hometown of Allentown, PA's website:
http://www.mcall.com/news/local/all-l...
December 21, 2007
1:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
OldDoc writes:
wow!wow , wow!! What anger and vitriol from the whole "I got mine -- get out of my way" generation!
I guess the mountains in Colorado,and in Vail,?? Belong only to the owners/skiers of Colorado?
Geee -- I thought they were counting on the dollars from the poor folk from places like Pennsylvania Kansas and Texas.
The hate spewed from the "good old boys/girls" -- "get off the hill-- you old geezer!" Seems to fit in quite nicely with the coming generation of ne'er-do-wells, growing up in this country.
?? Maybe George Bush is right, and we should just open the borders to a kinder, gentler form of people, to overwhelm and dilute these idiots.
lets see what the facts are, before we rush to hate speech.
? What is the ski patrol report/resort report/medical report (and time of medical treatment).?
dad's reflex protection of his child is understandable -- but not exactly an unbiased opinion of what happened.
finally -- I can hardly wait for these immortal 16-year-olds who pontificate about healing to get an injury in their 60s -- if they live that long, giving their attitude toward other people and life in general, exhibited on these blogs.
And a Merry Christmas to all of you.
December 21, 2007
1:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
Got_Duff writes:
evalynx
C.S. means Chicken S***t. I found your response was pretty funny.
My whole point is no one posting on here really knows what went down... except apparently that the old man did.
I was just attempting to point out that I felt there are possible circumstances where IN MY OPINION a lawsuit is appropriate. I am not saying those occurred here though. I am an avid snowboarder and for and I have seen many cases where "accidents happen" but I have also seen behavior that was obviously dangerous and reckless and put other safety and lives at risk. I have seen someone life flighted off of a mountain because a reckless snowboarder wiped them out after boarding at speeds and in a way that was blatantly
dangerous.
like I said I wold like to hear a third party independent witnesses' account before I pass judgement and crucify the old man. If the old man is full of it I got a rope and know of a tree.
December 21, 2007
1:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
evalynx writes:
Wow OldDoc... you must be pretty doggone old.
I am 58, two years younger than this guy, and I don't feel compelled to believe that the kid ran over him. The only "hatred" I can detect here is for frivolous lawsuits, which hurt all of us.
Why do you automatically take take the OLD guy's side... maybe because YOU are feeling sort of old. So, of course, it all's the younger generation's fault.
Then again... you suggest that... "Maybe George Bush is right..."
How anyone could even jokingly suggest that Bush has been right about anything... must be on the verge of Alzheimers.
No one would have suggested this "old" guy get off the hill... had he not acted like such a jerk. And someone who wants to sue a 7 year old (not a 17 year old by the way)... surely is a jerk. That much is clear... whatever the other facts are. If if a 7 year old were skiing too fast... do you sue him and his parents? The guy was employed... and it looks like he works from home... by Reader's Digest. They have INSURANCE.
December 21, 2007
1:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
OldDoc writes:
and PS: to Dr. Piperdoc:
nice clinical discussion --? Do you have the inside knowledge of his previous medical treatment?
? Are you testifying within a "reasonable degree of medical certainty" as to what type of previous surgery he had, and that this would cause-- "these arthritic structures tore his rotator cuff....could have fallen anywhere and has (sic) this result...or even forcefully lift his arm over his head and had this result"?
that is pretty strong medical expert testimony, Doc!
I'm not sure which disturbs me more -- your opinion regarding the quality of orthopedic surgical repair of the shoulder, or the frailty of an "old geezers over 60 years" who ventures out into sporting activities, after having had one of life's mishaps.
December 21, 2007
1:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
evalynx writes:
Okay Got_Duff... point made and taken.
Glad I made you laugh at least!
That's a beginning for sane discourse... finding common ground.
I agree... all the facts, as much as possible, should be considered.
I just have a strong disliking for how ready we are to sue in this country, even when... our medical bills, etc have been paid. We seem to think it is a "benefit," like paid vacation... or something.
December 21, 2007
1:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
srqwebguy writes:
For those of you saying, "Hey, it cost him $75,000" - read the fine print of the complaint posted earlier. It clearly indicates they are seeking reimbursement for the time his wife spent nursing him. That is allowed in lawsuits and workers comp cases, as spouses can be paid for their time, but it does NOT represent a material outlay of cash. It can be a bogus load of crap - just like this lawsuit.
December 21, 2007
1:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
shootercomingout writes:
EMAIL THIS IDIOT AND TELL HIM HOW YOU FEEL!! David.Pfahler@rd.com
December 21, 2007
1:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
evalynx writes:
OldDoc...
I am mighty suspicious of your background, but I'll resist the impulse to suggest anything.
If you are older, as I am, you would know... and admit... that what Piperdoc states about the condition of an OLDER person's joint's etc... is true. Sad to say... but it is.
I recently tore my rotator cuff after moving some boxes (about 15) to storage. Piperdoc's synopsis is quite creditable.
December 21, 2007
1:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
swice writes:
Look at the backlash against this guy...This sort of thing is why John Edwards is in a distant 3rd place!!
Edwards got rich in the tort court....
December 21, 2007
1:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
Sharo writes:
"'The boy told Pfahler he was sorry and started to ski away when the man grabbed Scott’s legs, cursed at him and said he would sue,' Robb Swimm told The Aspen Times."
It was the right shoulder that was injured. I assume that Pfahler is right handed. If his shoulder was injured how could he reach out, grab the child and hold on while the child is struggling to get away? The action of detaining the child could have caused the injury.
December 21, 2007
1:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
evalynx writes:
Swice, You're right. And as much as I hate frivolous lawsuits.... let me say loud and clear...
Regardless of who you are voting for, and I am not a fan for John Edwards, but for reasons other than his legal career and success therein... regardless... John Edwards has not brought about frivolous lawsuits. He has represented individuals who have been injured... horribly... in horrible situations. These were cases where the manufacturers of certain products knew previously of the dangers of their products and had not taken steps to make them safer. In particular, a young girl was disemboweled on a defective swimming pool drain... which could have been avoided had the manufacturer spent a little more to make it safer. So horrible and so apparent was the negligence of these companies that the juries made large awards to the families and, yes, John Edwards earned large fees for his representation. He earned it. For that reason, I believe John Edwards has been a good attorney and is at least honest in his pursuit of making the world safer. I would not vote for him for other reasons.
But... frivolous lawsuits... is what has heated up this debate.
December 21, 2007
2:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
DavefromPA writes:
In my last post I forgot to raise the question, doesn't Mr Readers Digest have insurance? I'm pretty sure insurance would pay for almost all of the bill, including necessities like PT and home care if it was needed.
December 21, 2007
2:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
Got_Duff writes:
evalynx
I 100% agree with your feelings about the law suit crazy culture we currently reside in. But if we wish to continue with some degree of freedom around each other we must be responsible (or held so)for how our actions affect others. The purpose of civil suits is for this, but just as with any useful tool they can be abused. I just fear that someday the government may try to wrap all of us in bubble wrap from head to toe, make laws that one foot must be flatly on the ground at all times (ie. speed walking rules), and determine our diets of tofu and kelp for us because we can't be responsible for our own actions. They are already trying to ake away our guns, our abilities to take certain actions, and or choice of how to spend our money. On that note the old man is responsible for his decision to be on the hill, but if public recreational skiers cannot be allowed to make such a choice without feeling reasonably protected from the blatant dangerous actions of others they will stop skiing and the resorts would probably have to shut down because of lack of revenue.
I hate irresponsible idiots... whether they are behind guns, cars, lawsuits, alcohol, drugs, raising their children, skiing accidents, or any other of the billions of ways they can screw up and have detrimental impact on others.
December 21, 2007
2:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
interested writes:
Check out the plaintiff's attorney's web site and bio:
http://www.chalathatten.com/Bio/James...
Apparently he has made a name for himself with this type of case. Under Colorado law, or at least what I could find, he seems to have a decent case. Not that I agree with it. This case will probably go to the party that can provide the most credible witness or witnesses. If the kid was blasting down the slope, and anyone who has ever been to vail can testify that some kids do, then the parents will almost certainly be held liable. If he was actually going about 10 miles an hour, which some kids do, then I think it will get thrown out. It's all about the witnesses.
If the guy grabbed MY seven year old child, this would be an assault case against me. Dad should have broken the guy's good arm.
Personally, I think if you are going to ski you should understand that this kind of accident happens daily and you need to make sure you've got good insurance. It is not a "safe" sport. I'm not sure if a "safe" sport even exists. Be prepared to get injured and be prepared to deal with it.
December 21, 2007
2:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
Houstongolfnut writes:
Any financial settlement (or court decision) is paid from the parents homeowners insurance policy; same as was the case for the Kleibold and Harris cash settlements to their victims families.
December 21, 2007
2:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
evalynx writes:
Next to frivolous lawsuits... my pet peeves include: parent's who accept no responsibility in raising... responsible children.
And "Got_Duff," I agree with YOU... that I do not want the Government in my business "protecting me" anymore than the bungling job it is currently doing.
YET... I am sick of my health insurance premiums increasing... because Joe Schmoe and Jane Schmuck must stuff their fat faces with Extra Double Double Cheeseburgers. Next to Global Warming... the biggest threat to our country is the continual drain on our economy of paying the health costs for those individuals too ignorant and/or too lazy to take care of theirself.
As to people being able to reasonably expect that they will be safe when they step out onto the slopes...
That is a utopian dream.
I work in Washington, DC and use public transportation (the Metro) everyday. I have been nearly run over on the street, have had cabs pull away before I was completely out the door, and been shoved onto the train and had my feet squashed on a regular basis. I've been squeezed in the middle seat, with result inflammation of my sciatic nerve, when I fly, by those individuals who are just plain FAT... and I have had my ears and sensibilities assaulted on the bus by the vulgar lyrics of rap.
I am suing no one. It's part of life. There is a blurring of the boundaries of our space... and there is a foolhardy belief that we can make other people responsible for every action that affects us. It doesn't mean... that I go quietly into the night. I address these things with the offending parties ... when they occur. I do not sue. In those cases, where the consequences have been extreme and the damage is irrevocable... yes, we should seek counsel and compensation.
In light of this guy having insurance coverage, etc... just what score is he settling then... even if... the kid was skiing too fast.... even then... this seems like overkill.
No matter. There is a certain natural balance in life, and those things either gained or lost by deceipt and deception are eventually righted.
December 21, 2007
2:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
evalynx writes:
Houstongolfnut... That it would be paid by their home owner's insurance ... that does not make it... okay. That's why everyone BELIEVES it's okay to sue. They convince theirself that it is only the insurance company that will suffer.
Claims drive up premiums... auto insurance, homeowner's... whatever.
Look what happened to the premiums after Hurricane Katrina.
This is how the attorneys convince people that... "it's really okay to sue these people... their insurance will pay."
December 21, 2007
3 p.m.
Suggest removal
OldDoc writes:
to evalynx:
since it's a slow day here at the rest home, I will reply to your "volley" --?? You do still play tennis, don't you??
1 --the majority of (early) responses classically took the position of "contempt prior to investigation", assuming that the old man was the problem and poor little "farquart" was innocent.
2 -- paragraph 5, in my first post, states "let's see what the facts are, before we rush to hate speech".. is still valid comment.
3 -- my background, of which you are "mighty suspicious",is a matter of long, public record -- years spent scraping up, peeling up, sewing up, and patching up people just like the "old geezer" who unfortunately happened to be skiing when he was suddenly introduced to a young member of the Swimm family.
4 --actions that result in injuries, have results, and greater or lesser responsibility for these "accidents" is obvious to maintain an ordered society.
5 -- this lawsuit may indeed be frivilous/absurd/unconscionable; or, it may be the result of the Swimm family taking no personal responsibility for the actions of themselves, or their family.
6 --?? And you, sir/madam??
Should I remain "mighty suspicious" of your background?
? And do you claim that no inquiry into this event should be made? or/And at what level should it be made?
without some sort of system of laws,, which you so stoutly defended in your impassioned defense of John Edwards, would lead to --Anarchy.....
the system may not be perfect, but seems to be better then most.
December 21, 2007
3:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
aznav writes:
I'm a little with the geezer. Like some others said, 50 pounds at 15 mpg clipping your legs has amazing results. Also, until one has had back/neck/shoulder/etc surgery, with its accompanying post op conditioning, I would be a little slow on the judging. Ironically, I've been on both sides of the fence as the "speed-of-light" kid of my youth and now, almost sixty, am looking out for those same whack jobs! Ditto for driving on the beltway. God does have a sense of humor. Oh, and it would make for an interesting Reader's Digest article - if you could only find it between the two hundred pages of advertisements. Boy, has that rag gone to the dogs.
December 21, 2007
3:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
evalynx writes:
OldDoc...
You will be happy to know that my first reply was so long... that the system swallowed it up!!
Basically, I agree with much of what you have gone on to say in your last post.
I wholeheartedly agree we must have laws... and that our system, imperfect as it is... is the best thing going... anywhere. It is such a joke when other countries criticize the U.S. ... especially when you look behind their "closed doors." Still, we can do better and should want to.
I don't feel that all of this has been a commentary or debate re:
the older generation versus the younger. I feel there is a definite frustration with our legal system.
So, yes... we do need laws... but they should be based in REASON.
That is what I would like to see come out of this case. I would hope the jury is not dazzled by some high powered attorney, practiced in the area of "ski law," as this one appears to be. I would hope the facts could be laid out as simply as possible, and that REASON would prevail... in a judge or jury's final decision. I hope for the truth to be told, and for some reason... my gut just tells me it is not being represented here.
I bow to your contributions in the medical field... where I once worked (administratively and as an assistant). I now work for as a legal secretary for a large firm in DC... and have a birds-eye-view on ... the birds (i.e. some are eagles... some are vultures).
Peace.
Merry Christmas to all... and to all a goodnight.
December 21, 2007
3:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
utskier writes:
1. How is this any different than a car accident? Yes, accidents happen. But that doesn't mean I'm not liable when I run into other cars. I don't get to simply offer up the passing "I'm sorry" and walk away.
2. Yes, I see it recited throughout the comments that we all ski "at our own risk." You all do understand, don't you, that means we can't sue the resort operator for natural conditions or simple negligence. It doesn't mean I can't sue someone who hits my car in the parking lot, pushes me down the stairs at the lodge or recklessly collides with me on the mountain.
3. I'm a little surprised at the lack of reference in the comments to the old rule, "The downhill skier has the right-of-way." It's always seemed to me an immensely functional allocation of responsibility on the hill. If I look out for everyone in front of me (and ski in control), and everyone behind me does the same, we'll all get home in one piece. Don't they teach this anymore? It seems not.
4. I'm saddened by the tone and tenor of the early postings here. I guess I shouldn't be. Anonymity has that affect. Just look at how people act in their cars on the highway.
5. When did skiing become such a contact sport? Seems to me it made the turn when we got the detachable chairs and everyone stopped talking to each other on the chair rides. Again, anonymity seems to breed irresponsibility. I used to meet the most interesting people from around the country in my early ski days. Now, you're lucky to get a hello.
6. How about this variation on the facts: The old man was mowed down by a corporate CEO. Does that change your opinion? Why? Or this one: The old man's house was burned down by an 8-year-old playing with matches. Does that generate the same, "accidents happen" response?
Have a great holiday everyone. And enjoy this great snow we're getting.
December 21, 2007
4 p.m.
Suggest removal
spiritdf writes:
Bottom Line: You can't sue the ski resort (Thanks Colorado!) so you go after the next logical choice with deep pockets...the manufacturer of the skis, snowboard, etc. If this guy was out for the money, he'd be suing K2, Salomon, or Burton, not little Jimmie Jingleheimerschmidt.
Regardless, the guy is an a$$. If I sued for every injury, black eye, or seeming act of disrespect in my short 40 years, I'd be a Billionaire now (like John Edwards!). Live and Let Live.
Spiritdf--C Springs
December 21, 2007
5 p.m.
Suggest removal
Senji writes:
lol at the people that are defending the MAN and cant believe people are jumping behind the little boy.
obviously, few if ANY of you "old man defenders" know crap about skiing. and just because you took a family vacation to Breckenridge does not make you an expert. sorry.
its an 8yr old. odds are, the 8 yr old was either flying down the mountain like a champ, in which case, would have caused SERIOUS injury, or, he was being a snow plow, and the 2 collided. odds are, they are both snowplows. anyone that sues a kid for hitting him on a ski resort is NOT a regular skiier, obviously...so he wasnt going very fast. he was probably doing the little "falling leaf" thing. why the hell wasnt he paying attention? why was he on the slopes if he cant stop? the boy isnt excused, im sure he wasnt paying attention as well. crap happens. oh well, the poor guy hurt his shoulder. i slipped on ice at Keystone in the parking lot and dislocated my shoulder...after a full day of snowboarding my butt off in the Outback. Nothing like doing Starfire at 45-60mph. the parking lot is much more dangerous.
ban the man from the slopes, hes to dangerous. i wonder how many people he cut off that day by plowing his butt down the slopes?
December 21, 2007
5:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
justustoo writes:
We're all missing a couple of things here.
60 really isn't that old! It's not like Phahler has one foot in the grave and another on a banana peel. One has to be in relatively decent health to handle the riggors of skiing. He should have been able to withstand the impact of the child when falling into SNOW. A 48 pound child is not tall enough to impact the shoulder directly to cause such severe injury. I more buy into the fact that maybe the fall aggrivated a previous injury which was definately not the boy's fault. Had the shoulder not been previously injurred and developed the scar tissue the severity of this injury would have been minimal.
Also, if Phahler was so badly hurt, how was he able to grab the kid by the legs and bring him down? His shoulder was "destroyed" but yet he had to use that same shoulder to assault this kid. Sounds more than a little fishy to me.
December 21, 2007
6:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
mguydish writes:
utskier and others who defend the Plaintiff: You are on the other side of the coming revolution.
"Every Generation needs a new revolution " - Thomas Jefferson
You have no idea what is like to grow up in a small town with no traffic lights, and to be known by last name because every