The City of San Diego, southern California, is to pay $23.75 million compensation to a cyclist who was left paralysed when he was hit by a driver who was high on crystal meth.
Lawyers for the cyclist, Juan Carlos Vinolo, had said that the city had failed to trim back overgrown bushes on the road where the crash happened, reports latimes.com.
But in its defence, the city claimed that it should not be liable because Mr Vinolo had been on a training ride with other cyclists, and said that riding at speed in a group was a “hazardous recreational activity” and could prevent claimants injured while doing so from seeking compensation.
The crash happened in August 2014 on a one-way road on Fiesta Island and the driver, Theresa Lynn Owens, is currently serving 19 years in prison for driving under the influence of methamphetamine.
Mr Vinolo sustained injuries including a broken spine, leaving him paralysed from the waist down, eight broken ribs, and also lost a kidney.
Two years ago, a civil jury ruled that the city was 23 per cent liable for the crash, and apportioned 77 per cent of the blame to the driver.
In his lawsuit against the city, Mr Vinolo said that it had “created, fostered and maintained Fiesta Island in such a manner to exponentially increase the risk of serious injury to cyclists that use the Fiesta Island Road.”
The lawsuit also pointed out that in a press conference one week after the crash, then Mayor Kevin Faulconer said that improvements to the road would be made, including new signage and cutting back bushes.
18 thoughts on “$24 million compensation for cyclist left paralysed by driver on crystal meth”
Welcome to compensation
Welcome to compensation culture US style!
Secret_squirrel wrote:
I bet most of that money will be used on medical bills.
hawkinspeter wrote:
I read somewhere that an ambulance taking you to the hospital will cost you in excess of $1,000.
I read an interview with a couple whose baby had been born prematurely and had to spend its first month or so in hospital (coincidentally, the same as my son). That couple’s medical fees added up in excess of $1,000,000!!
brooksby wrote:
Absolutely facking barbaric. And coming soon to an
NHS near youbrooksby wrote:
I read an interview with a couple whose baby had been born prematurely and had to spend its first month or so in hospital (coincidentally, the same as my son). That couple’s medical fees added up in excess of $1,000,000!!
— brooksbyThis is why the tories have defunded, demoralised and are privatising the NHS; there’s lots of money it in for them and their donors.
brooksby wrote:
Mates living in Washington DC recently told me that Uber drivers there are now habitually packing plastic sheets in their boots (trunks!) because so many women in labour are calling Ubers to get to hospital because they can’t risk the cost of the ambulance. Terrifying.
Rendel Harris wrote:
Sure, that’s what it’s for.
As long as they don’t also have a shovel and large cable ties in there.
Secret_squirrel wrote:
Although these look eyewatering (and are), in the states it must be remembered that med is privately paid for, so folk with serious injuries are often put into penury as a result. Obversely huge payouts are often eaten up purely by med bills etc
In addition payouts are sometimes directed by juries.
A really interesting case was the old lady who spilled McDonalds coffee on herself and received one of these eye-watering payouts, and also received a large amount of criticism as a result. McDonalds helped to feed this press by pretending that they were forced to print “contents maybe hot” on their cups – poor ickle MD
In actual fact MD was persistently breaking food safety rules by serving their coffee well in excess of the maximum limit, and had been for over 10 years, in sole order to satisfy their marketing campaign promising coffee “hot at your desk”. They had had hundreds of complaints previously due to scalding injuries. In short, their coffee was dangerous and they knew it
The old lady in question received 3rd-degree burns requiring skin grafts as a result of MDs willful negligence
The payout was decided by a jury so as to be equivalent of 2-day revenue from coffee – the victim had offered to settle for 20k to cover meds – MD refused, wanting only to pay $800.
There was no requirement in the ruling to print warnings on cups – this was pure pisstake from MD. What they should have printed was “This product is served too hot to consume, and if spilled on you will cause 3rd degree burns in seconds. We know this is the case, as we have already knowingly injured 1000s, but we continue to do it. Cos we can”
Or they could have just obeyed safety legislation and served coffee at a drinkable temperature…..
Not that anything I’ve said is anything to do with cycling…..
Captain Badger wrote:
Careful what you say Captain – some folks are remarkable litigious, even when they often lose. Although in a bizarre twist it turns out that one of their cases was largely due to our creative undercover cops.
chrisonatrike wrote:
Interesting stuff.
I particularly like the bit where the judge found that MD “indirectly exploited and caused suffering to animals”. WTF?? Indirectly?? that’s their entire business model….
Captain Badger wrote:
The payout was decided by a jury so as to be equivalent of 2-day revenue from coffee – the victim had offered to settle for 20k to cover meds – MD refused, wanting only to pay $800.
— Captain Badger“….a jury awarded her nearly $3 million in punitive damages for the burns she suffered.”
Having once had the misfortune to try one of their breakfasts, that amount seems reasonable.
Captain Badger wrote:
I’m conflicted, does it belong here?
quiff wrote:
very possibly. I digress, my apologies
Looks like you’ve been
Looks like you’ve been reading Fake Law by the Secret Barrister! Just read it myself, interesting book.
I had heard the same from the
I had heard the same from the Legal Eagle on Youtube I think. McD’s were regulalry sued for it but just paid out mostly as it was normally not as serious, then decided to take a stand against this woman because she didn’t take the derisory offer due to the amount of damage caused.
alchemilla wrote:
I haven’t as it happens, but thanks for the recommendation. This is now on my Christmas list
23% liable… sounds
23% liable… sounds incredibly precise! I wonder how exactly they came to that number …
According to this the $24M is
According to this the $24M is 100 percent of Vinolo’s medical and earnings damages and then 27 percent of his and his wife’s general damages. The driver “defaulted” – I assume that means they declared bankruptcy (or similar).
Similar levels of compensation have been awarded in the UK – a teenage girl with severe spinal injuries was awarded £23M. Although in that case it was the driver’s insurance that paid out – I find it rather strange that the US only requires very limited 3rd-party insurance.