What is the name of your state? Louisiana
I have a neighbor (family) that is engaged in litigation with the parish and state government. I think the case sorely lacks merit, but I would appreciate your opinions to satisfy my curiosity:
There were two sons, 18 and 23. They got into a day long protracted fight over the younger one's (let's call him Tom)unauthorized use of the older's (let's call him Dick) truck...playing around in the yard with it while the older son was working, while the truck had no gear oil in the rear end. After about two rounds of this, the parents called the police, who came to the house and generally told them to knock it off. When the fighting broke out again, there were loud threats to kill one another, not really serious, but serious enough that the parents, along with the only other family member, a sister, 20, took Tom to the Sheriff's Office for a "talking too". (We live in a very rural area, about ten miles from the nearest small town). When they got to the S.O., everyone got out except Tom. The sister (let's call her Jane) stayed outside while the parents went in to request that the Sheriff talk to Tom. Tom jumped from the back seat of the vehicle into the front, and somehow jimmied (I guess he was familiar with this trick for this particular vehicle) the ignition on as the parents had taken the keys inside with them, and sped off, screaming to Jane that the "cops would never take him alive". She told the father, who beckoned a deputy and told him what happened, and the father and the deputy began pursuing Tom. Tom drove from one small town towards their house (about 10 miles) with the police officer and the father in pursuit, who radioed to another deputy in the area to wait in the driveway of the house to keep the brothers separated in case Tom went home. When Tom passed the house, he kept going at a high rate of speed, and the second deputy joined the pursuit as the main chase car. It was a deputy and his wife, who happened to be in the squad car, in the area. The pursuit continued with the deputy trying to stop Tom by passing, etc. The speeds well exceeded 100mph. They were heading towards the next town, (about 5 miles from it), and the deputy kept trying to pass Tom. He managed to, and tried to brake and stop Tom, who went around him, passing him on the right side of the road, on the shoulder, and began speeding up again. Then, evidently, Tom accidentally went off of the right side of the road again, going about 100mph, swerved back on and overcorrected, swerved sideways and collided his passenger side to a head on (T-bone) impact with an oncoming vehicle. Tom was killed instantly, and the driver of the other vehicle was very seriously injured. The accident was investigated by the State Police, not the parish S.O., who found no fault on the part of the officer. And, to me, it seemed like a fair and impartial, as well as very thorough investigation.
At first, the parents were OK with the police, actually apologizing to them. Within two days, they said that "some things weren't adding up", and they sought counsel and eventually sued, as did the driver of the other vehicle. The suits have since been consolidated. Incidentally, there was a gun in the vehicle. It was said to be in the trunk, having been left there ....I am not sure if Tom knew the gun was in there or not. It is arguable, as the gun was usually left in the car in the event I was called on a nuisance alligator complaint, as the father was assisting me at the time with this, and we used that vehicle. Tom would usually go with us.
These people are very good friends of mine, and I surely wish them no ill will. In fact, I wish only the best for them, and honestly miss the dead son. Believe it or not, he was a good kid, and had never been in any legal trouble before. He was simply a little "wild", and did not do any drugs or alcohol at all (and, no traces at all were found in his body fluids). However, when I look at this thing as objectively as I can, I just do not see much of a cause of action. I tried to state briefly and objectively the basis of this suit, and I am very curious as to your opinions on its validity, and your thoughts on their odds of success. If you have time, I would really appreciate you pointing out their case weaknesses. Maybe by playing devil's advocate, I can assist them with their litigation startegy. Thank you all!
I have a neighbor (family) that is engaged in litigation with the parish and state government. I think the case sorely lacks merit, but I would appreciate your opinions to satisfy my curiosity:
There were two sons, 18 and 23. They got into a day long protracted fight over the younger one's (let's call him Tom)unauthorized use of the older's (let's call him Dick) truck...playing around in the yard with it while the older son was working, while the truck had no gear oil in the rear end. After about two rounds of this, the parents called the police, who came to the house and generally told them to knock it off. When the fighting broke out again, there were loud threats to kill one another, not really serious, but serious enough that the parents, along with the only other family member, a sister, 20, took Tom to the Sheriff's Office for a "talking too". (We live in a very rural area, about ten miles from the nearest small town). When they got to the S.O., everyone got out except Tom. The sister (let's call her Jane) stayed outside while the parents went in to request that the Sheriff talk to Tom. Tom jumped from the back seat of the vehicle into the front, and somehow jimmied (I guess he was familiar with this trick for this particular vehicle) the ignition on as the parents had taken the keys inside with them, and sped off, screaming to Jane that the "cops would never take him alive". She told the father, who beckoned a deputy and told him what happened, and the father and the deputy began pursuing Tom. Tom drove from one small town towards their house (about 10 miles) with the police officer and the father in pursuit, who radioed to another deputy in the area to wait in the driveway of the house to keep the brothers separated in case Tom went home. When Tom passed the house, he kept going at a high rate of speed, and the second deputy joined the pursuit as the main chase car. It was a deputy and his wife, who happened to be in the squad car, in the area. The pursuit continued with the deputy trying to stop Tom by passing, etc. The speeds well exceeded 100mph. They were heading towards the next town, (about 5 miles from it), and the deputy kept trying to pass Tom. He managed to, and tried to brake and stop Tom, who went around him, passing him on the right side of the road, on the shoulder, and began speeding up again. Then, evidently, Tom accidentally went off of the right side of the road again, going about 100mph, swerved back on and overcorrected, swerved sideways and collided his passenger side to a head on (T-bone) impact with an oncoming vehicle. Tom was killed instantly, and the driver of the other vehicle was very seriously injured. The accident was investigated by the State Police, not the parish S.O., who found no fault on the part of the officer. And, to me, it seemed like a fair and impartial, as well as very thorough investigation.
At first, the parents were OK with the police, actually apologizing to them. Within two days, they said that "some things weren't adding up", and they sought counsel and eventually sued, as did the driver of the other vehicle. The suits have since been consolidated. Incidentally, there was a gun in the vehicle. It was said to be in the trunk, having been left there ....I am not sure if Tom knew the gun was in there or not. It is arguable, as the gun was usually left in the car in the event I was called on a nuisance alligator complaint, as the father was assisting me at the time with this, and we used that vehicle. Tom would usually go with us.
These people are very good friends of mine, and I surely wish them no ill will. In fact, I wish only the best for them, and honestly miss the dead son. Believe it or not, he was a good kid, and had never been in any legal trouble before. He was simply a little "wild", and did not do any drugs or alcohol at all (and, no traces at all were found in his body fluids). However, when I look at this thing as objectively as I can, I just do not see much of a cause of action. I tried to state briefly and objectively the basis of this suit, and I am very curious as to your opinions on its validity, and your thoughts on their odds of success. If you have time, I would really appreciate you pointing out their case weaknesses. Maybe by playing devil's advocate, I can assist them with their litigation startegy. Thank you all!
Last edited: