"Drifting Dan" Carlock wins $1.68 million after being left at sea

[ReefHound]

During my first depo, he asked me about work history. I quickly mentioned doing radio, then TV, then moving out here. He had me go back to my radio career and asked me to detail it. I said, "You mean you want me to tell you about EVERY radio station where I worked and what I did?" He said, "Yes." So for 45 minutes I riffed on my radio career.

Now there's no way any of that is going to be used at trial. Maybe it gave the lawyer a better sense of who I was, maybe it didn't. But the point is that at the depo, you're throwing in everything including the kitchen sink, knowing full well you won't need it all at trial.

Sounds to me like he was testing your patience, to see if you would get frustrated or edgy.

 

[Leejnd]

I must say I certainly respect you for being open minded about the information presented.

I also hope you are not referring to me in the part I have bolded above. I have said from the beginning I felt a number of people contributed to the chain of events that resulted in this disaster including Dan, the DM, the person who answered for Dan, and the captain.

The information that Ken provided confirmed information I was given before this thread sprang to life. The information Bruce and the other legal minds have given seems to me to support my feeling that the amount was too high.

Dan's motives really are of no concern to me, he has a right to lodge the suit as he did but I can not assign altruistic motives to someone who sues for 4mil. What he chooses to do with the money if he gets it

not of interest to me either really.

I think and I have stated previously that people including Dan should be able to put this behind them and move on. I sympathize with all involved and their families who are also impacted by this long stressful case. The wheels of justice turn slowly and I can tell you that for me the stress of this long drawn out process would be as bad as a few hours floating in the ocean wondering if I was about to have a shark do a taste test!

I don't think there is any point in DAN posting here or trying to explain himself. People will come to their conclusions no matter what he says IMHO he can not win the public opinion poll any more than the other individuals involved.

My comments weren't directed at you at all, and I should have made that clear. They were directed at the people who have criticized me (not in the thread, but via PM) for changing my opinion at all. I have no problem whatsoeverl with your opinion. You've been clear and straightforward about it. Unlike so many, who seem to not be able to handle people disagreeing with them and take it as a personal affront (and then rudely lash out - again, not you), I do not have a problem at all with being disagreed with. I might vigorously defend my position, but I certainly would not insult, demean, or belittle the person simply for disagreeing (as has been done to me, mostly in PMs btw). We all come to our opinions differently, and have different life experiences that play into how we interpret the information we come across.

I sincerely apologize for not making it clear that my comments about changing and/or holding fast to ones opinions were not about you at all. I'm sorry. I hope you accept my apology.

 

[doctormike]

That said, if floating in the ocean for a few hours is worth half a million dollars an hour, I think you would get more than a few volunteers.

Hmmm. This has been mentioned before, but I'll comment again.

I wouldn't float off like Dan did in the ocean for a half a billion dollars an hour, even given the fact that a lot of our posters here might assure me that I had a very good chance of being found because of the current direction, the shipping lanes, etc...

 

[Doug Charney]

A question for Ken...
Was it proven that Dan didn't attempt to swim to the boat?

 

[Leejnd]

A question for Ken...
Was it proven that Dan didn't attempt to swim to the boat?

Interesting question. I'm not sure it's possible to "prove" it, given that Dan is the only person who was floating there, and only he knows whether or not he attempted to swim to the boat.

My understanding, from info I've learned in this thread as well as other sources, is that there were discrepancies on this particular issue. Dan testified that he saw the boat leave. He also testified that he didn't kick at all. Yet, based on Ken's calculations of current and visibility, he HAD to be kicking towards the boat in order to see it leave, given that it left 20 minutes after he surfaced and had he floated without kicking the current would have moved him at least 2000 feet away -- too far away to see it.

So I believe that remains an open question. Ken, can you confirm that? Was there ever any resolution to that issue?

Frankly I can't help but wonder why Dan would say he didn't kick! I believe that's the main reason why the jury attributed any part of the blame to him at all. He would have helped his case, seems to me, had he said he DID kick. Maybe he was simply telling the truth - in spite of the harm to his case? (What a novel concept!)

 

[boulderjohn]

During my first depo, he asked me about work history. I quickly mentioned doing radio, then TV, then moving out here. He had me go back to my radio career and asked me to detail it. I said, "You mean you want me to tell you about EVERY radio station where I worked and what I did?" He said, "Yes." So for 45 minutes I riffed on my radio career.
...

I was deposed for three full days. Subtracting breaks, it's about 21 hours of tesitmony.

Just taking a wild guess, I would bet Dan will be billed by his attorney at a very high rate for the time he spent listening to your ramblings about your radio career.

 

[doctormike]

Just taking a wild guess, I would bet Dan will be billed by his attorney at a very high rate for the time he spent listening to your ramblings about your radio career.

I'll take that bet....!

I assume that Dan's lawyer gets paid by a contingency fee, like most do in these types of cases.

 

[boulderjohn]

I'll take that bet....!

I assume that Dan's lawyer gets paid by a contingency fee, like most do in these types of cases.

I know. And how much did he win? And how much will they bill them for their services?

 

[Leejnd]

I'll take that bet....!

I assume that Dan's lawyer gets paid by a contingency fee, like most do in these types of cases.

That's my understanding as well. The amount of hours the plaintiff's lawyer puts into this case doesn't translate to more money. Only if they win does he get anything at all. It's a percentage of the winnings, not a by-hour fee. (I expect it's something like 1/3, but I'm just speculating, based on what other attorneys I've spoken to have suggested).

As much as we like to bag on lawyers, one important point I feel needs to be made is that lawyers often take a HUGE risk taking on cases like this. There is never a guarantee that it will go in their favor - and if it doesn't, they can be left with hundreds of hours of unpaid work. Even the most "open-and-shut" case can end up going down in flames once you get in front of a jury. And even if a win is almost assured, it can take years before anyone sees a penny. That's a pretty tough way to run a business.

This just happened to my brother, who is an employment attorney in another state. He worked on a seemingly ironclad case for four years, putting in hundreds if not thousands of hours of work. It was a high-dollar-figure case - had they won, it was expected to be a large verdict. But they didn't win - much to everyone's surprise, including the defendant's own attorney, who was scrambling to settle the entire time. But the plaintiff held out - and the jury stunned everyone. The plaintiff in the case has lost nothing, other than time. My brother, on the other hand, has almost lost his entire practice, due to the amount of unpaid work that he and his team put into this case, as well as thousands of dollars in now-unrecoverable expenses that they paid out of their own pockets. They are now teetering on the brink of bankruptcy.

Personally I applaud the lawyers who are willing to take these risks. What if none of them would? What would happen to the victims of negligence and wrongdoing? They'd have no recourse, because nobody would take their cases. That's certainly not in ANYONE'S best interest.

 

[Mike Boswell]

Hmmm. This has been mentioned before, but I'll comment again.

I wouldn't float off like Dan did in the ocean for a half a billion dollars an hour, even given the fact that a lot of our posters here might assure me that I had a very good chance of being found because of the current direction, the shipping lanes, etc...

(Chuckling) ... And you may well be worth that: If so, Bill Gates would be jealous, and your annual taxes would be enough to bail out Wall Street. Again.

My point was that IMHO the award is out of all proportion to the actual damages suffered by Mr. Carlock, and also out of proportion to the negligent acts of the boat crew. Disproportionate awards, or punishments, are not justice.