Reply to Tourist submersible missing on visit to Titanic

Forum Index » Off-Topic

Reply to "Tourist submersible missing on visit to Titanic"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Titan submersibles released an official suspension of operations today, no further comment.

Let the lawsuits commence.[/quote]

The entity is formed offshore and with all the legal liability protections they could dream up. I’m not sure the damages juice is worth the law firm squeeze. [/quote]

That waiver probably won't hold up in court. [/quote]

Why would billionaire families bother to sue? Time, effort, emotional torture for what? Company is defunct and doubtful there is insurance available. No lessons to be taught as the person responsible is already dead.[/quote]

Some of the executives are still alive. If billionaires won’t sue and the waivers are airtight, then I guess Oceansgate executives have nothing to worry about. Otherwise, they should get into brace position. [/quote]

Have you heard the phrase “you can’t get blood from a stone?”

People have a romantic view of lawsuits…like you will run in, yell “guilty,” and collect your $200M check. It’s years of work and emotional trauma and nothing is a sure thing. And if you’re suing a defunct company, there’s nothing to “win.” [/quote]

Someone keeps reviving this thread to argue that litigation is pointless. I wonder why. [/quote]

NP.

I’m wondering why you are so intent on encouraging litigation, which would likely be pointless here. 
[b]
Except: the plaintiff’s attorney would of course be paid well.[/b]

Are you a civil litigator interested only in your own bottom line, PP? [/quote]

DP.  A law professor from my alma mater (OK, I'm biased) was on the radio the other day opining that because of the waivers and plain obviousness that what they were doing was extremely dangerous, the families wouldn't get a judgement in a lawsuit.  Further, that because of this it will be very hard for them to find counsel insofar as lawyers get a percentage of settlement.  No pay, no play.[/quote]

Also, stockton rush’s insistence on calling the passenger “mission specialists” wasn’t just hokum. They were considered crew and not passengers because killing the crew is not as big of a deal as killing your passengers, legally speaking.

https://www.insider.com/titan-sub-passengers-mission-specialists-oceangate-avoid-legal-jeopardy-2023-7

The New Yorker article referred to is very good, but I didn’t link because it might have a paywall. [/quote]

He could have called them pineapples too. If they functioned as passengers, then that's how they will be viewed in court. [/quote]

It would be hard to sustain a claim that people paid $250k each to be employees. [/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