Reply to Suing for ice on sidewalk

Forum Index » Real Estate

Reply to "Suing for ice on sidewalk"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]People in this thread are flat out vile and needlessly hostile to OP. And they're mostly stupid and have zero understanding of the American legal system. [/quote]

Can you explain (no snark). I have responded previously that I don’t understand how she has a case when the owners cleared their walk and were not negligent. Does the US legal system really just allow anyone to sue with no evidence and no noticeable ice? And if so, why would every car accident caused by black ice not be able to be blamed on HOA’s and the county? I’m kind of fascinated by this. Thanks![/quote]

There's too many variables for anyone to be able to opine on whether OP has a viable case. But most people are arguing over the wrong issues. The main issue will be whether the state OP was injured in requires home owner's to maintain their sidewalks. Some do, some don't. The other issue will be whether the homeowner breached their duty (compare the homeowner who failed to put out salt during a multi day period of cold weather and freezing rain versus the homeowner who didn't put out salt 4 hours into a cold snap).

Instead of these issues, posters are going off on wild tangents. Firstly, OP can prove through her testimony that the ice was there. She doesn't need anything more. It would be up to the jury to decide whether or not it finds her credible. Secondly, waiting 6 months to file suit is not a long time at all. She can bring suit anytime before the statute of limitations expires, which for torts would be at least a few years. Thirdly, whether or not OP has short term disability insurance is immaterial as to whether or not she has the right to sue. Finally, there's simply no such thing as "countersuing" because you're angry or annoyed about being the party to a lawsuit, and the US doesn't allow fee shifting unless there's a specific statute that allows for it (like civil rights cases that allow a prevailing plaintiff to recover attorney fees in addition to damages).

It seems there's a toxic mix of trolling and ignorance in this thread. It's disheartening, and shows the true colors of many of the posters here. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics