Scuba death results in a lawsuit?

[Greg_MacMaster]

Thanks Thal,

No one is sending me - I'm just collecting data and preparing for questions (which could delay) the process if I don't have the answers. It's happened alot in the past 2 years, so I try to have all the facts and be as prepared as possible. Not a state employee and I do preside over the oganization that will assist in the intentional sinking. Since the state has no money (catch the news about budget crisis in Michigan) we want to answer questions on envrironmental and economic impact of the sinking. Knowing the liability issues possible would help in our draft proposal.

I've contacted DAN and they do have some info (which is betetr than none) and as to governmental immunity... It's here in Michigan. So why would they want to slow or stop teh intentional sinking process if they have governmental immunity? The thought, btw, was when the vessel touches the bottomlands, it becomes the property of the state of Michigan (assuming it's abandoned).

 

[Thalassamania]

I guess my approach would be to simply state that there is not concern that the state would be sued, 'cause it can't be without an act of the legistlature agreeing to be sued. Best of luck, we all look forward to more diveable wrecks.

 

[SnakeRiverPirate]

I'd contact the State Attorney General's office to get help with researching numbers and cases.

 

[Greg_MacMaster]

Thanks Snake, I can't contact him as I'm not an employee of the government. I tried that before and just the wait time is about 6 months. I had to contact our State Representative/Senator to get anything back.

 

[DBailey]

I would approach this more from the stand point of a state/county/city park.

State, counties, and cities build recreational areas all of the time. I would consider the wreck to be a recreational area. The same level of liability for a park should be applied to the wreck.

Also, for a wreck, I think you'll have a smaller exposure rate as compared to a park. First, the people will need a way to get to it. Second, they would need a desire to go to it. These two factors alone will limit the amount of people on it.

 

[Greg_MacMaster]

DBailey,

Makes sense to me - but when has a court of law made sense on some cases? We're probably going to have to write a memorandum of law for the city and county and recommend this to the State Atty general's office of future projects similiar to this one. This pilot project is a "fact finding mission" and will serve as a template for future sinkings in the Great Lakes if successful.

 

[DBailey]

Actually, most of the courts are reasonable, it is the jury of 12 random people that causes all of the fuss.

I know the Straits of Mackinaw was intentially sunk in the Evanston/Chicago area. I don't know how the laibility was handled, but it might be another avenue for you to explore.

 

[jeraldjcook]

You might try contacting one of the law school libraries in your area. I'm currently a law student and I know for a fact that our librarians help all sorts of people with legal research. They could at least point you in the right direction.

 

[Greg_MacMaster]

Thanks DBaliey... Already contacted them. There was no follow up for teh sinking and as far as documented cases that went to trial (aside from a slow EMS response or contaminated air) there was no filings.

 

[Teamcasa]

I am not a lawyer nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express.

In order to prevail in any civil liability case, the plaintiff must demonstrate the defendant was negligent and in some states, grossly negligent or willfully put the public at risk. Like digging a deep hole in the street and not posting a sign or warning. Or in the case of an intentional sinking, did not post a warning that diving on this risk requires certification and is a dangerous activity. Since it’s difficult to post a sign over a dive site, the state can require only franchised/licensed dive operations to carry divers to the site and/or require all divers to obtain a permit to dive that site. Here is a good example.

Dave