Suit filed in case of "Girl dead, boy injured at Glacier National Park

[MaxE]

I don’t agree at all. There is a fairly conservative circuit in that Federal court - which would certainly hear any verdict against an agent like PADI and ample precedent to argue they could have no liability as a matter of law (contract law specifically).

there is no privity here. NONE. so the only claim that can stand is agency- and the traditional agency tests fail to establish agency here because of the way PADI sets up its contracts, disclaimers, agreements, student materials and certification programs.

could a court find liability - sure- by stretching precedent. Could an appellate court reverse such a stretch…likely- especially in that circuit…

.

 

[Omisson]

.

See above.

 

[formernuke]

We will have to wait and see what evidence is presented if it doesn't settle, personally I think it will settle

 

[Omisson]

What is the purpose of an agency in your mind? What are yearly dues for? What are the expectations that instructors and the diving public to expect for the funds obtained from the dues of instructors and dive centers?

Ok- I think I explained this before.

doctors go to medical school. Then pass medical license board in a state. Then a specialty board certifies them In a field of medicine (internal medicine, surgery, psychiatry, Opthomology)

So, in your view, if they commit malpractice, is the med school responsible at law?
How about state medical board that charges them every year a license that comes with ethics rules and practice guidelines for a fee?
How about the specialty board that they pay dues to, and who promulgates manuals in the field of specialization - and can discipline, sanction, or remove them from the board certification?

Based on that a nearly identical situation (to PADI certifying the instructors who were trained by a school-some dive shop- and then employed by some other dive shop), should people be able to sue the state licensing board? The specialty board too? Even if the doctor violated taught “best practices” set out by that board?

I think not. Yet that is the “agency” argument being made by folks who don’t understand either the legal dynamic or implications of finding this sort of “agency”. At its core, PADI would need to be revenue sharing or directing operations at the shop -not simply setting standards and providing initial “certification” of instructors - otherwise it’s just like hundreds of other non-agency sorts of certification and standards boards that HAVE NEVER BEEN FOUND LIABLE THROUGH AN AGENCY ARGUMENT at law.

if this liability is found under the PADI type of “agency” it will open a Pandora’s box of litigation in those other boards for their licensure and certification systems.

the law does not exist in a vacuum- there are ripple effects and consequences to any sort of decision like this…far beyond the little pond of scuba diving.

 

[Esprise Me]

I also see clear evidence of Mill’s contributory negligence as well.
[...]
and that the diver would ignore the basics of her prior training on THIS dive?

What do you see as Mills' contributory negligence and ignoring the basics of her prior training?

 

[formernuke]

The only thing I see in Mill's could be not getting a hose. But with no prior drysuit experience that's a big stretch

 

[Omisson]

What do you see as Mills' contributory negligence and ignoring the basics of her prior training?

I’ve only posted this 4 times- perhaps you should read a thread before asking the same question for the fifth time?

”…. you don’t “just trust” your instructor when it comes to:

1-proper weight- you learned that in OW pool #1 and reiterated it in OW Dive #1. 40#, really? Any 90# diver thinking adding 45% of their weight in lead when norms are 10% is a HUGE red flag. Moreover- she loaded that as NON-DITCHABLE WEIGHT- how did she expect an emergency ascent with weight that wasn’t removable? What was her emergency procedure plan?

2- using non-functional equipment…by putting on a used Drysuit you bought the day of, then knowing you had no inflator mechanism and still using it? Really? Learning to check equipment and abort any dive that doesn’t pass the s-drill safety checks is OW classroom and BWRAF pool and open water ALL DIVES.

3- knowing you have none of the requisite specialties used on the dive and Being okay doing all for the first time in a single dive; a-deep, b-night, c-Drysuit, d-ice, e-AOW, f-low viz; there is a whole section on mission objectives and not task loading, using incremental experience growth…

So while the shop and instructor are clearly at fault, the victim here violated rules and training she learned too…. “


“In the section on weighting in Open Water AND the elearning for Advanced Open Water (which had to be completed BEFORE DIVING) for a OW dives the rule is 10% +/- of body weight adjusted for salinity and exposure protection.

In the elearning Equipment section - it is specifically stated to “never dive with equipment that is malfunctioning”.

No one disputes the errors made by the shop and instructor.

But PADI isn’t to blame when teachers and students ignore numerous standards and common sense.

And my point was simply that Mills also made serious judgment errors… (in law we call that comparative fault) regardless of the fact she was “new”- she had been told in her elearning and her OW the baseline weighting and equipment rules- rules she also ignored.

And since PADI wasn’t told that a gear rental was made to a non-certified diver by the shop- until AFTER the Mills death-what does that have to do with their liability in either case?

Moreover- more generally, if some idiot goes to a shop- rents gear and claims to have a certification- while bad practice to be sure not to check that cert out- how is the dive shop really responsible for someone doing something stupid like that? It’s not like he was their student or was diving with the shop.

Was this a Tragedy- yes. Are the Instructor and shop to blame- yes-mostly. But that doesn’t change the fact that standards were broken by instructors and the victim failed to follow rules she was taught…. None of which are issues of PADI, it’s standards, or it’s programs.”

 

[Omisson]

The only thing I see in Mill's could be not getting a hose. But with no prior drysuit experience that's a big stretch

Hardly. She made- from a training perspective- at least three major errors in judgment.

 

[formernuke]

Hardly. She made- from a training perspective- at least three major errors in judgment.

Elaborate I've been following this but this many post is to much to go through

 

[Omisson]

Elaborate I've been following this but this many post is to much to go through

Look two posts up.