Pothole Story Worse
$1.5 million settlement for a bike accident where the cyclist ran into a barricade.
The cyclist was drunk - and he's still getting paid:
The cyclist was drunk - and he's still getting paid:
- The accident that forever altered Baker’s life occurred at 1:45 a.m. on June 9, 2009 at the corner of Damen and Waubansia.
Baker, who had just graduated from Columbia College with a degree in sports marketing, was riding his bike after a night out drinking when he collided with the barricade set up to mark a collapsed sewer catch basin.
First Deputy Corporation Counsel Leslie Darling said there were a “number of issues that left the city exposed” to damages.
“The barricade’s light was not functional. The barricade was actually in the hole, instead of in front it [where] a bicyclist would be able to see and react to it,” Darling said.
So there was evidence that the city workers put the barricade in the hole and not some gang banger messing around with city property? And the light was non-functional the entire time it was in place? There's proof of all this?
- Baker was not wearing a helmet and he had been drinking prior to the accident. But, his blood alcohol level was “not legally relevant because there is no law prohibiting bicyclists from driving under the influence," Darling said.
Really? But there is responsibility assigned, isn't there? We'd say the city did more than it's share of precautionary work, but bad life choices lead to bad outcomes.
- “Due to the catastrophic nature of his injuries, if a jury found in his favor, it’s likely he would be awarded a large damage amount. He demanded $12 million to settle the case. The proposed settlement is a very cost-effective measure to limit the city’s financial exposure.”
You know what would be an even better "cost-effective measure"? Zero. But these jackasses at Corp Counsel can't wait to settle and call it "cost-effective." Jody Weis was an asshole extraordinare, but he got one thing right - fight these suits. Fight em all. Nuisance suits dropped by an inordinate amount once plaintiff attorneys realized that the days of easy payouts were suspended. They had to be more discriminating in the suits filed because they were going to eat the losses and the City was going to come after them and their clients for fees and damages.
Labels: we got nothing
posted by SCC at 12:01 AM
41 Comments:
That's incorrect.
The statesment operating a bicycle drunk is wrong
A bicycle is still considered a vehicle. And its against the law to operate a vehicle while intoxicated.
I believe there was a case of a individual that was trashed on a bicycle that ran into pedestrians
a few years back he was charged.
Plus the fact since he hit the barricade he was not in full control of the vehicle. negligent driving
City workers were careless and stupid. The city pays. the biker may have been drunk, but he should also have the expectation that city workers would do their job in a safe and workmanlike manner. After all they get paid enough to do the work properly. The city got off cheap.
Making friends and votes one incident at a time. Dumb, dee Dumb Dumb. Taxpayers lose. Does the Corp. Council believe they are not very bright and are concerned they will not win so they settle the case? Maybe clout babies.
Dont forget he also wasnt wearing a helmet.
And at night a bike is requried to have its own lights.
“Due to the catastrophic nature of his injuries, if a jury found in his favor, it’s likely he would be awarded a large damage amount. He demanded $12 million to settle the case. The proposed settlement is a very cost-effective measure to limit the city’s financial exposure.”
Talk fast and shove the pen at whoever's standing next to the bed...
Ethics! Transparency! &c.
Obviously the rider is related to somebody with juice.
"the light was off and the barricade was in the hole"...
Yeah, so, the 2 watt bulb died after 3 months of blinking? BFD... I really don't know of a single spot in the City where it's dark at night (well, unless McStreetlight was drinkin), so that shit's out the window...
And the barricade was IN the hole... so was this a 6" hole, and a 2" barricade? Because from what I've seen, these things are pretty big and hard to miss... Plus, they have reflectors all over them, and there's streetlights... car lights... restaurant lights...
All reflecting off the damn thing, so one ought to be able to see it LONG before they flip over the friggin thing...
As for being drunk: Bicyclists are supposed to obey the rules of the road, so that's no drinking and riding either... Esp. in the streets of Chiraq...
I'd have told this guy to go piss up a rope...
"...alcohol level was “not legally relevant because there is no law prohibiting bicyclists from driving under the influence," Darling said."
Does this mean I can pedal drunk with no worries of a dui?
This is unbelievable. Are our attorneys that incompetent? His attorney's must have laughed their ass off in the office when they got back.
So now we are responsible for every drunk that gets on a bike and hits a pothole on our wonderful "European" bike lanes? We don't have "European" courts. We have courts that will bankrupt this city with this nonsense.
Time to get rid of the bike lanes!
......and do we have the name of the law firm? Politically connected?
While I am a lying coward, how dare you describe me as "an asshole extraordinaire".
A third Police Officer has had to have his car towed from the lot in 004 due to pot hole damage caused from one of the huge craters in the lot. If you come there after a rain beware the craters fill and they look like nothing but a puddle. Still no help from anyone despite numerous requests. And you keep asking for more contact cards! We will get right on it!
They could care less!
They should lower the salary of those half-ass lawyers every time they settle a case.
every nit wit that falls on a sidewalk drunk should get paid!
Sounds like he could have been charged with reckless conduct considering he was pedalling while drunk. His actions placed others and himself in harms way. He should not have been awarder any case.
But, his blood alcohol level was “not legally relevant because there is no law prohibiting bicyclists from driving under the influence," Darling said.
Bullshit. Certainly sounds like evidence of contributory negligence to me.
Not a cop. Just a lawyer.
Anonymous said...
City workers were careless and stupid. The city pays. the biker may have been drunk, but he should also have the expectation that city workers would do their job in a safe and workmanlike manner. After all they get paid enough to do the work properly. The city got off cheap.
6/26/2014 12:33:00 AM
Not necessarily "city workers".
Could well have been one of the mayor's precious independent contractors.
I don't often see a genuine City of Chicago work truck anymore.
I do see the City Water Dept. guys out there re-doing the shoddy work the independents screw up. Water mains seem to be independents' most common gaffes.
Gone are the days (even when there were any of those days) that the Corp Counsel's office would take anything to trial.
With so many potholes as with gangbangers, people just become numb and tolerant with their existence. So these types of problems go unreported. Not that the City doesn't have enough patronage resources to drive up and down streets to fix these problems, its that these incompetent hacks don't care.
On the other hand the drunk bike rider simply has a lawyer who probably sued for $3m and settled for half, and that constitutes a win for the city as well as the plantiff accepting half the blame.
Would it be cynical to ask if the law office is a Rahm 2016 campaign contributor?
Excuse me, I have to go find a hole to fall in and have
the city pay me!
All in all, the city was right to settle. A civil jury would likely have awarded this drunken goof on a bike who HBD, had no helmet and likely no front headlight on his bicycle many more millions. I don't like the fact that he's getting paid, but I think the City did the right thing in this case. With lawyer's fees, it won't be enough to live off of for the rest of his life.
There will be no common sense on this issue. One must determine the city attorney's motivation to settle: curry favor with the plaintiff attorneys for a job after leaving public service. Never underestimate the political and financial motivations of a true public bureaucrat.
As someone who just went thru a federal lawsuit, I found the attorneys at Corp Counsel to be professional, smart, funny and extremely competent. We won our case because they worked their butts off prepping and defending us. They did not want to settle the case any more than we did. Don't blame them for city negligence.
Who was the plaintiff's atty? What relation do they have to City Hall? What law school did they go to?
Yeah, so, the 2 watt bulb died after 3 months of blinking? BFD...
Remember those black or yellow "Toledo Torch" things Streets and San used back in the 50's and 60's, before those battery operated blinking lights mounted on sawhorses? They looked like bombs about to go off, with that flame flickering above. Rain, snow-nothing snuffed that flame until it ran out of kerosene!
And if a car tire clipped them, they'd go flying, even under another car-with the flame still going as they were specially weighted on there bottom to keep them from tipping over!
Anonymous said...
That's incorrect.
The statesment operating a bicycle drunk is wrong
A bicycle is still considered a vehicle. And its against the law to operate a vehicle while intoxicated.
I believe there was a case of a individual that was trashed on a bicycle that ran into pedestrians
a few years back he was charged.
Plus the fact since he hit the barricade he was not in full control of the vehicle. negligent driving
6/26/2014 12:19:00 AM
Hey, officer, you missed a pertinent part of the DUI law: The law says "A driver may not operate a motor vehicle while under the influence..." The necessary motor is usually not there on a bicycle. That is why you can get a DUI while driving a lawn mower or golf cart but not a bicycle. Must be a motor vehicle.
Anonymous said...
“Due to the catastrophic nature of his injuries, if a jury found in his favor, it’s likely he would be awarded a large damage amount. He demanded $12 million to settle the case. The proposed settlement is a very cost-effective measure to limit the city’s financial exposure.”
Talk fast and shove the pen at whoever's standing next to the bed...
Ethics! Transparency! &c.
6/26/2014 01:38:00 AM
Watch that guy show up on some reality show about extreme bicycling down mountains.
" Anonymous said...
"...alcohol level was “not legally relevant because there is no law prohibiting bicyclists from driving under the influence," Darling said."
Does this mean I can pedal drunk with no worries of a dui?"
No. Read the Illinois IVC. States that bicycles are obligated to follow all the Rules of the Road except those that obviously do not apply.
You can be DUI'ed but Implied Consent portion is probably not relevant.
Just a blow-off excuse by a lazy Corp Counsel. The cyclist was drunk, no helmet and no headlight. Sounds to me like a little contributory negligence.
Why not settle? Money ain't coming out of her pocket. A lot less work.
1st and 16th the city paycheck is direct-deposited into her checking account. WGAF
"Does this mean I can pedal drunk with no worries of a dui?"
6/26/2014 03:59:00 AM
Pedal, maybe, but not steer in a straight line or remain upright for long...seen em run smack into a light pole at 3 MPH goin "WHOOAA! WHOOAA! Oh Jesus!"
>crunch< >thud<
Not a good idea.
Just think of how much money the city would give the family of this guy that lost his head...
http://nypost.com/2014/06/25/driver-loses-his-head-while-trying-to-lose-the-cops/
The idiot drunk bike rider should have to PAY the city for assisting his sorry ass.
tort reform
This idiots family should NOT get a penny!
Once drunk, all bets are off and a big fuck you!
Da Pelon
All City Lawyers are stupid and can't fight these garbage lawsuits off!
A good attorney can see that this is a bunch of bullshit, but since the city would rather payoff then fight the cases, this is what happens! This should be a dead bang loser!
This is why these frivilous cases keep getting filed because there is NO FEAR of losing to the city!
must be a motor engine with at least 5 hp for a DUI in Illinois.
As for the D.U.I. the Illinois Vehicle Code changed that one where it is not now Illegal to ride a bicycle while intoxicated. Must be a motor vehile, powered by some kind of engine. They did the right thing to sellte. With the potholes so bad, everyone will sympathize with the cyclist. Remember, in Civil Court, you only need a preponderance of evidence, not proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.
They would rather settle, you never know what a jury will do.
"The cyclist was drunk, no helmet and no headlight."
6/26/2014 12:57:00 PM"
...and, given the current "fixie" trend, (fixed gear bike, one speed only, and quite often the required brakes are removed too) quite possibly had chosen to have no ability to downshift or stop properly.
If the City was smart, they's hire Loevy and Loevy to represent The City!
@ 6/26/2014 09:36:00 AM
Yup!
The old Toledo Torch aka "Smudge Pot" was the real deal. They could burn for more than 24 hours straight.
They did look like the bombs on Rocky & Bullwinkle though... XD XD XD
right now, I have over 20 potholes in my alley. The City knows about it and isn't doing shit. Vote these useless fuckin Democrats [Communists] Out of Office once and for all.
Post a Comment
<< Home