Woman suing family of boy she killed… thoughts?

posted 2 years ago in The Lounge
Post # 2
390 posts
Helper bee

I would have a lot of anger if I was driving responsibly and struck and killed someone who was “playing” in the road – it infuriates me to see people using the streets as their personal playground. I would never recover from such an incident…a certain amount of anger thrown into the torrent of emotions you’d surely feel in such a situation seems normal.

However, the thought of suing the family? Wow. That’s unreal. 

Post # 4
1472 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: August 2011

I agree that this seems a bit crazy, but also, they sued her, and this is a response to that. It might be her best legal recourse for getting them to drop their suit. I’d bet it’s pretty complicated legally and that’s why she’s doing it…

Post # 5
5769 posts
Bee Keeper
  • Wedding: October 2014

This, from the article, is a pretty important fact:  Simon’s (the driver) suit is a countersuit to one levelled against her by Majewski’s (the cyclist) family.

if a motorist is driving with proper care on a dark road and the cyclist is not using a light, and isn’t in the bike lane (or one doesn’t exist), then the cyclist is at least equally responsible for the accident; the article also says ““An independent accident reconstruction completed by law enforcement officials found that there was nothing Ms. Simon could have done to avoid the collision,” the statement said.”

So the druver was involved in a tragic accident. Very tragic. But not her fault.  And while she’s struggling with the fact that she’s killed a teenager— by accident, but still he died— there’s a lawsuit of almost a million dollars against her!!! Should she just sit there and let herself get sued? It’s incredibly expensive to defend yourself in a suit like this. Filing a counter suit is pretty much expected, and, depending on the jurisdiction, may be the only chance she has to recover her lawyers’ fees if/when she is found not civilly liable in the suit against her.

Post # 8
602 posts
Busy bee

What an awful situation, but I’d have to say I side with the motorist. She was not at fault yet her life was ruined. Of course the family of the deceased teens life was ruined as well but he and his friends shouldn’t have been riding their bikes in the middle of the road at night. They were stupid and unfortunately, something tragic happened. I don’t think that either party should sue the other but if the parents think they’re entitled to something from the motorist then she has every right to defend herself and file a counter claim. 

Post # 9
602 posts
Busy bee

akirasan:  Exactly. She shouldn’t be to blame, and that’s why she’s counter suing. If she shouldn’t be to blame then why does the family have the right to sue her and not only ruin her emotionally but also financially? With my limited knowledge of the legal system, my guess is that the ultimate goal is to settle so that neither party owes the other anything. 

Post # 10
4042 posts
Honey bee

This whole story just seems to be riddled with misleading information. The lawyer of the boy’s family says he is “shocked about the lawsuit,” yet is leading a lawsuit against driver who wasn’t at fault. The driver is claiming PTSD and inability to work, while the family wants her to cover emotional, funeral and trauma costs. 

Honestly, given the police investigation ruled that she was not a fault, no lawsuits should have been involved. It is really tragic what happened to the child, but dragging out these lawsuits is only making everything worse.

Post # 11
6964 posts
Busy Beekeeper
  • Wedding: August 2012

They sued her first, and I’d sue back too.

Actually I’ve been in almost this exact situation. I woman blew a yield sign speeding, I hit her (I had the right of way) and the passenger was killed. I was not found at fault, and she still tried to sue me. Needless to say, her lawyer basically told her it would never happen and she dropped it. But if she had pursued it, I would have gotten a high end lawyer and filed a counter suit.

It’s horrible that someone died, but the person who hit them was not at fault and has also suffered. I know I lost time from work, had minor injuries from the crash, was without my car for 4 months (had to buy a new one with no insurance money because the police considered it evidence), and have to live with that guilt for the rest of my life.

Post # 12
686 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: October 2013

An accident is an accident. The kid didn’t go riding his bike to end his life and this women did not get into her car to end someone else’s. the article didn’t mention who was negligent in this accident. I think both families should drop their cases and move on and grieve. 

Post # 13
3352 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: June 2010

This is the sort of incident that could happen to any driver. I live right near a skate park, and I cannot tell you how many near misses I have had due to young people playing chicken and trying to scoot out in front of cars last second to impress their mates.

I feel for the driver. I feel for the young mans family. No one should be suing anyone.

Post # 14
3637 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: September 2015

Assuming the article is right and they were riding at night without the proper illumination, assembly on a dark street – hitting them was almost inevitable. I think it is ridiculous for the family to be using the driver. I understand that this is a tragedy but no amount of money would be able to make up for the loss of your son. Why inflict financial pain and burden against someone who has to live with this tragedy and guilt for the rest of her life? It seems to me that she is just trying to protect herself by using back. 

Post # 15
1436 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: September 2010

In Ontario a cyclist is considered like a pedestrian and in Ontario when a car strikes a pedestrian there is a reverse onus and the driver of the car has to prove that the pedestrian was grossly negligent, otherwise the driver of the vehicle is presumed at fault.

This is a unique situation though because if an independent third party has concluded that there was no way to void the collision, then it is not likely that the driver would be found at-fault. The county may be. So long as she did not do anything to void her insurance policy (driving without a licence/drunk etc.), then she is not paying out of pocket to defend herself for the suit, her insurance company will have hired lawyers to defend her. It is extremely likely that the insurance company will pay something to settle the suit without going to trial. It’s just how personal injury in Ontario works.

Leave a comment

Sent weekly. You may unsubscribe at any time.

Find Amazing Vendors