Parents sue Boy Scouts for 2011 negligence death

[boulderjohn]

We seem to have a fundamental disagreement with how guilt/responsibility is assigned. You seem comfortable that you know all the relevant details and applicable case law and that you can ipso facto assign guilt.

Wonderful for you. It would greatly simplify our legal system, think of the savings! We could all form a line outside your door and you could be emperor.

Wouldn't a more prudent choice (for you and PADI) to wait for those facts to be determined and then take action?

In some cases, enough facts are known right from the start. Remember that the case we are talking about is not a criminal trial to determine what happened. The case is a lawsuit to see what kind of compensation the family of the deceased will receive as a result of what happened. What happened is well known.

We have just learned in another thread to which I cannot link you because it is in a protected area that the basis for the expulsion was the incident report. The incident report is written by the instructor in his own words. Apparently there was enough there to let PADI determine that expulsion was called for.

We have also learned that after the incident report and expulsion, there was a police report. The police report was apparently much worse in its description of the instructor's activities.

 

[demed]

Wouldn't a more prudent choice (for you and PADI) to wait for those facts to be determined and then take action?

Prudent for who?
If the investigation determines a violation the member is sanctioned appropriately then and there - in fact an investigation can happen outside of a court case or a fatality, just check how many instructors and dive centers get expelled every quarter for quality issues.

If PADI were to wait (for what?) the same folks who ask to wait probably would complain that PADI was being coy and not taking decisive action.

 

[Omisson]

We seem to have a fundamental disagreement with how guilt/responsibility is assigned. You seem comfortable that you know all the relevant details and applicable case law and that you can ipso facto assign guilt.

Wonderful for you. It would greatly simplify our legal system, think of the savings! We could all form a line outside your door and you could be emperor.

Wouldn't a more prudent choice (for you and PADI) to wait for those facts to be determined and then take action?

Not when counsel for the instructor came on the blog and conceded all these points as facts in the case.

 

[JohnN]

In some cases, enough facts are known right from the start. Remember that the case we are talking about is not a criminal trial to determine what happened. The case is a lawsuit to see what kind of compensation the family of the deceased will receive as a result of what happened. What happened is well known.

We have just learned in another thread to which I cannot link you because it is in a protected area that the basis for the expulsion was the incident report. The incident report is written by the instructor in his own words. Apparently there was enough there to let PADI determine that expulsion was called for.

We have also learned that after the incident report and expulsion, there was a police report. The police report was apparently much worse in its description of the instructor's activities.

OK John, so then explain why PADI settled with the plaintiffs and then maneuvered to obfuscate their position and collude with the plaintiffs. Only later to reverse course? I think things are a bit more complicated than they seem on the surface.

 

[demed]

OK John, so then explain why PADI settled with the plaintiffs and then maneuvered to obfuscate their position and collude with the plaintiffs. Only later to reverse course? I think things are a bit more complicated than they seem on the surface.

Are you ready to go to law school?

We have discussed ad nauseam how the rules to navigate the court system are little more complicated that you are willing to accept - we have also discussed ad nauseam how the court system can find an individual or a corporation liable even AFTER the party has transacted and removed oneself from the proceedings.

Yet, there is a huge big conspiracy by the evil PADI borg to destroy the dive industry - it goes hand in hand with the moon landing hoax, obama's birth certificate, and the water chlorination that leads to socialism

 

[JohnN]

Are you ready to go to law school?

We have discussed ad nauseam how the rules to navigate the court system are little more complicated that you are willing to accept - we have also discussed ad nauseam how the court system can find an individual or a corporation liable even AFTER the party has transacted and removed oneself from the proceedings.

Yet, there is a huge big conspiracy by the evil PADI borg to destroy the dive industry - it goes hand in hand with the moon landing hoax, obama's birth certificate, and the water chlorination that leads to socialism

Ahh, so the counsel for PADI are just incompetent? First they were a party to the suit, then settled and removed themselves, and then they're back in. . .
Seems a rather complicated strategy, doesn't it?

 

[DelrayDM]

It would be like successfully suing a medical school every time one of their graduates is guilty of malpractice.

As I understand it, once you are graduated by the medical school they have nothing to do with how you practice medicine. It does not certify you to practice medicine, it just prepares you to get your license to do so. (I know two M.D. that never practiced medicine. They used the M.D. to do other fine work.)

Dive certification agencies require DMs, Instructors etc, to do certain things each renewal period, and possibly other things every other year.
They also tell you how to do paperwork, if you want to keep certification.
They tell you you have to have prove you have insurance to keep certification.
They tell you you must always have a snorkel while instructing
They tell you you must never have a camera while instructing.
They tell you this is the minimum to do to run a discover scuba event.

And none of that is controlling day to day how you run your business.

Sounds like the kind of procedures (rules?) that people have to do to maintain a real estate license.

 

[ktomlinson]

As I understand it, once you are graduated by the medical school they have nothing to do with how you practice medicine. It does not certify you to practice medicine, it just prepares you to get your license to do so. (I know two M.D. that never practiced medicine. They used the M.D. to do other fine work.)

Dive certification agencies require DMs, Instructors etc, to do certain things each renewal period, and possibly other things every other year.
They also tell you how to do paperwork, if you want to keep certification.
They tell you you have to have prove you have insurance to keep certification.
They tell you you must always have a snorkel while instructing
They tell you you must never have a camera while instructing.
They tell you this is the minimum to do to run a discover scuba event.

And none of that is controlling day to day how you run your business.

Sounds like the kind of procedures (rules?) that people have to do to maintain a real estate license.

The main difference is that in cases of professional licenses, you are licensed by a government entity, in many cases a state board or department. No one in the US is licensed to instruct (at least not that I'm aware of). So in professional cases you have legal authority to do a type of work. In scuba instruction we only have agreements with agencies and insurers. As far as I know I could just start instructing under my own agency and the government wouldn't have a problem with that. If I could convince an insurer to insure me the newly created agency would then be as legitimate as any other agency out there.

 

[tursiops]

In addition, you don't do those things to keep your certification, you do them to remain a member of an organization. Once an instructor/DM you are always that, because you are certified that as of some particular day you passed certain qualifying tests. But that is not enough to allow you to teach, nor to be a PADI member. And there is no license....

 

[Omisson]

Ahh, so the counsel for PADI are just incompetent? First they were a party to the suit, then settled and removed themselves, and then they're back in. . .
Seems a rather complicated strategy, doesn't it?

Try reading the numerous posts that have explained REPEATEDLY why PADI would settle - unless you are blind- looking at jury verdicts and rationales is a gamble for anyone - regardless of actual legal liability.