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

[formernuke]

From what I understand, criminal charges can only be "personal", so the criminal action will be focused only on the instructor. Is this correct?
Sorry, but my understanding of US legal system is very limited.

Correct, the instructor would be charged.

 

[formernuke]

I wonder how many people have ever had a serious drysuit squeeze while wearing an unsealed, flooded drysuit.

Where did you get unsealed and flooded?

 

[divezonescuba]

It was in the second ammended complaint. David Concannon, the lawyer representing the family verified it in a post this week somewhere on the board.

 

[MrVegas]

Where did you get unsealed and flooded?

Paragraph 227 of the 2nd Amended Complaint:

"Had the Gull Dive Defendants inspected Linnea’s dry suit on the morning of November 1, 2020, they would have noticed that the zipper on the rear of the dry suit was sticking and incapable of being closed all the way. Consequently, a two-inch gap existed between the final point at which the zipper could travel and the fully closed position."

Paragraph 228 of the 2nd Amended Complaint:

"Had the Gull Dive Defendants inspected Linnea’s dry suit on the morning of November 1, 2020, they would have noticed that the open zipper would allow cold water to enter the dry suit, flooding it, soaking Linnea’s thermal undergarments and creating, at best, a distraction for the diver and, at worst, the potential for hypothermia and the loss of buoyancy and mobility of the diver."

Paragraph 254 of the 2nd Amended Complaint:

"As Linnea was donning her Brooks dry suit, Nathan Dudden assisted her in closing the back zipper, which Linnea was unable to reach. However, without Linnea’s knowledge, the zipper was not closed completely, leaving a 1-2 inch gap where cold water could flow freely into the dry suit upon immersion."

Paragraph 277 of the 2nd Amended Complaint:

"At a depth of 59 feet, the water pressure on Linnea’s body would be 38.5 psi, almost triple what she experienced at the surface. At this point, Linnea was experiencing suit “squeeze,” which would have been painful. She was visibly exhibiting the symptoms of “squeeze,” including the inability to breathe without restriction, to kick freely, and to move her arms freely. She was obviously having difficulty breathing, exhaling frequently and sharply. It is likely that cold water was also flowing in through the gap in the zipper on the back of her dry suit, soaking her thermal undergarments. "

 

[formernuke]

No wonder she was so heavy, massively overweighted plus flooded. Just gers worse and worse.

 

[MrVegas]

No wonder she was so heavy, massively overweighted plus flooded. Just gers worse and worse.

Again, are you assuming that the Plaintiffs' allegations in the Complaint are proven facts? I'm not making any judgment as to whether the allegations are all correct or not, but ask yourself -- how do YOU know that was the case?

 

[Subfiend]

Thank you for this offer. I have many questions about this case. I mean no disrespect and I realize that a terrible tragedy occurred and I feel terrible for the family. However, this is the litigation forum, and the discussion on this forum has largely seemed to take the allegations in the Complaint as proven facts. Of course, the Defendants denied liability and even some of the allegations changed as the case proceeded. So here are some questions, and I hope none of these seem harsh -- I have only been trying to follow this through some of the court documents.

1. Were depositions conducted in this case? If so, who was deposed and when?
   
2. In the first Complaint, you alleged that the “Gull Dive Defendants” (defined as the Olsons, Snow, and Liston) placed weights in Ms. Mills' BCD and drysuit pockets. In the Second Amended Complaint, you alleged that Nathan Dudden placed the weights in the BCD, and only indicated that additional weight was later found in the drysuit pockets. Why was this allegation changed and who put the weights in the BCD and drysuit pockets?
   
3. In the first Complaint, you alleged that Kendra Potter sold the drysuit to Ms. Mills. In the Second Amended Complain, you alleged that Heidi Houck sold the drysuit to Ms. Mills. Who sold the drysuit to Ms. Mills?
   
4. Why was Seth Liston dismissed from the case?
   
5. Did Ms. Mills pay for the Advanced Open Water class?
   
6. Did Ms. Mills pay for and complete the online eLearning?
   
7. In the Second Amended Complaint, you allege that “At no time prior to or on November 1, 2020, did Linnea complete or return any form of medical statement, liability release and assumption of risk agreement, non-agency agreement, statement of understanding of safe diving practices, and/or statement of understanding and student learning agreement to the Gull Dive Defendants.” However, some or all of these documents appear to have been attached to Defendant Snow's answer to that Complaint. Why was this allegation made?
   
8. The medical forms attached to Defendant Snow's Answer appear to indicate that Ms. Mills answered “no” to all of the medical questions. Did the Defendants request Ms. Mills' medical records? Were they provided? Did they indicate that any of those answers would have been inaccurate?
   
9. Was the unedited video provided to Defendants during discovery?
   
10. In your Second Amended Complaint, you state: “Debbie Snow, simply advised Linnea that she could enter the water without an operational dry suit and use her BCD as her sole means of buoyancy control.” I believe Defendant Snow denied this allegation. What was the basis for this allegation? What were the exact words that Defendant Snow stated to Ms. Mills? Was there testimony from any of the parties or witnesses concerning this allegation? If Ms. Snow was deposed, what did she say she said?
    
11. In your Second Amended Complaint, you indicated that Ms. Mills “did not join the Dry Suit Diver instructional dive Snow was conducting with Bob and E.G., in the presence of Linnea.” Were you alleging that this dive was an instructional dive or not? Was there any deposition testimony concerning what Snow told the non-joining divers, including Ms. Mills? If the second, fatal, dive was a separate dive, were you alleging that was an instructional dive? If so, where does that appear in the Second Amended Complaint, or what testimony was provided in discovery on that subject?
    
12. The Second Amended Complaint contains a detailed narrative of how the drysuit squeeze allegedly affected Ms. Mills during the dive. These may be a perfectly reasonable assumptions, but what, exactly, was the evidence that you would have introduced in court indicating that the drysuit squeeze was the actual cause of death? I ask for two reasons: first, some people have certainly had drysuit squeezes at depth – e.g., forget to attach inflator, and second, you also allege that cold water was likely flowing through the gap in the zipper of her drysuit. Would this have alleviated the squeeze?
    
13. Finally, while I realize it may not be disclosable, was there a monetary settlement? If so, how much?

1. No.
2. We obtained additional evidence after the filing of the original Complaint and we filed the First Amended Complaint and Second Amended Complaint to conform to this newly discovered evidence. Principally, on the topic of the weights, we spoke to Nathan Dudden and he provided us with a large number of documents. Nathan, who was employed by Gull by this time, admitted to placing half the weights (22-24 pounds) in the zippered storage pockets of Linnea's BCD. He said he did not place weights in Linnea's dry suit thigh pockets. It was not conclusively determined who put the weights in the thigh pockets. However, Bob Gentry's video shows Debbie Snow placing rocks in the thigh pockets of EG's dry suit, and the weights recovered from Linnea were Gull rental weights.
3. Heidi Houck.
4. For charitable reasons. The injuries he suffered are significant he at least made an effort to help Linnea.
5. Yes. Linnea paid for a PADI Advanced Open Water course and she was given the PADI manual for this course. There was no eLearning.
6. There was no eLearning.
7. The allegation was made because it is true. Linnea never completed these documents, nor were they collected prior to her death. To the contrary, they incomplete documents were in a bag containing Linnea's personal effects, which remained in Debbie Snow's truck. An eye-witness told us, and this person was prepared to testify, that they were present when the bag was later removed from Snow's truck, he saw the documents and they were incomplete. Furthermore, there were two types of handwriting on the documents later filed by some of the defendants, and Linnea's family members did not recognize some of the writing, the signature or the style in which the date was written (day-month-year) as being Linnea's.
8. Linnea never completed the medical form. The questions she did answer were truthful and medical records were provided to support these answers.
9. Yes, but not for approximately a year after the case was initiated. This was because the family wanted the video protected from disclosure but the defendants would not agree to a proposed Stipulated Protective Order. So, the plaintiffs filed a motion for entry of a protective order, which some or all of the defendants opposed, and the video was filed with the court for in camera review. Eventually, the court ruled that a protective was appropriate but the parties were directed to meet and agree on the language, which we did. From memory, I believe this was filed in March 2022, and the video was produced thereafter.

 

[Subfiend]

Thank you for this offer. I have many questions about this case. I mean no disrespect and I realize that a terrible tragedy occurred and I feel terrible for the family. However, this is the litigation forum, and the discussion on this forum has largely seemed to take the allegations in the Complaint as proven facts. Of course, the Defendants denied liability and even some of the allegations changed as the case proceeded. So here are some questions, and I hope none of these seem harsh -- I have only been trying to follow this through some of the court documents.

1. Were depositions conducted in this case? If so, who was deposed and when?
   
2. In the first Complaint, you alleged that the “Gull Dive Defendants” (defined as the Olsons, Snow, and Liston) placed weights in Ms. Mills' BCD and drysuit pockets. In the Second Amended Complaint, you alleged that Nathan Dudden placed the weights in the BCD, and only indicated that additional weight was later found in the drysuit pockets. Why was this allegation changed and who put the weights in the BCD and drysuit pockets?
   
3. In the first Complaint, you alleged that Kendra Potter sold the drysuit to Ms. Mills. In the Second Amended Complain, you alleged that Heidi Houck sold the drysuit to Ms. Mills. Who sold the drysuit to Ms. Mills?
   
4. Why was Seth Liston dismissed from the case?
   
5. Did Ms. Mills pay for the Advanced Open Water class?
   
6. Did Ms. Mills pay for and complete the online eLearning?
   
7. In the Second Amended Complaint, you allege that “At no time prior to or on November 1, 2020, did Linnea complete or return any form of medical statement, liability release and assumption of risk agreement, non-agency agreement, statement of understanding of safe diving practices, and/or statement of understanding and student learning agreement to the Gull Dive Defendants.” However, some or all of these documents appear to have been attached to Defendant Snow's answer to that Complaint. Why was this allegation made?
   
8. The medical forms attached to Defendant Snow's Answer appear to indicate that Ms. Mills answered “no” to all of the medical questions. Did the Defendants request Ms. Mills' medical records? Were they provided? Did they indicate that any of those answers would have been inaccurate?
   
9. Was the unedited video provided to Defendants during discovery?
   
10. In your Second Amended Complaint, you state: “Debbie Snow, simply advised Linnea that she could enter the water without an operational dry suit and use her BCD as her sole means of buoyancy control.” I believe Defendant Snow denied this allegation. What was the basis for this allegation? What were the exact words that Defendant Snow stated to Ms. Mills? Was there testimony from any of the parties or witnesses concerning this allegation? If Ms. Snow was deposed, what did she say she said?
    
11. In your Second Amended Complaint, you indicated that Ms. Mills “did not join the Dry Suit Diver instructional dive Snow was conducting with Bob and E.G., in the presence of Linnea.” Were you alleging that this dive was an instructional dive or not? Was there any deposition testimony concerning what Snow told the non-joining divers, including Ms. Mills? If the second, fatal, dive was a separate dive, were you alleging that was an instructional dive? If so, where does that appear in the Second Amended Complaint, or what testimony was provided in discovery on that subject?
    
12. The Second Amended Complaint contains a detailed narrative of how the drysuit squeeze allegedly affected Ms. Mills during the dive. These may be a perfectly reasonable assumptions, but what, exactly, was the evidence that you would have introduced in court indicating that the drysuit squeeze was the actual cause of death? I ask for two reasons: first, some people have certainly had drysuit squeezes at depth – e.g., forget to attach inflator, and second, you also allege that cold water was likely flowing through the gap in the zipper of her drysuit. Would this have alleviated the squeeze?
    
13. Finally, while I realize it may not be disclosable, was there a monetary settlement? If so, how much?

10. This allegation was based on the statements of two eye-witnesses. The witnesses relayed that the people who were helping Linnea suit up (including two Gull employees) discovered that the inflator hose on the rental regulator would not connect to the nipple on Linnea's dry suit. They tried fitting additional hoses that were brought from the dive shop in vehicles, without success. This was because the dry suit was made for commercial diving, and the connector was a type not usually used for recreational diving. One or both of the Gull employees advised Snow that the hose would not connect and her response was "That's ok, she doesn't need it. She can use her BCD for buoyancy." This statement was repeated and questioned by an eye-witness and one of the Gull employees responded "Debbie said she would be ok." After this, Linnea shrugged her shoulders and said "I guess it's ok." No depositions were taken but some witnesses were questioned by the NPS ISB.
11. Your question is written in a confusing manner. All the divers and eye-witnesses told us and the NPS that the dives were intended to be instructional dives. The documents and statements indicated, in general, that this was supposed to be a dry suit class, and three of the divers were traveling to Glacier for dry suit dives, but one did not make it due to a flat tire. The rest of the divers were there for a mix of courses. Here is the break down:

• Bob Gentry and EG were present for a Dry Suit course.
• Linnea joined the group to complete open water dives for AOW, but it is not clear which AOW dives she would be completing.
• Joel Wilson was traveling to Glacier as part of the Dry Suit course, but he did not make it due to a flat tire. Wilson's dry suit was given to Seth Liston to use. Wilson later received a Dry Suit certification for the fatal dive, even though he was not there.
• Liston, who had a Junior Open Water certification, later received three PADI certifications based on the fatal dive: AOW, Deep and Peak Performance Buoyancy.
• Nathan Dudden, who had a Junior Open Water certification, paid $200 for "advanced instruction," but he did not actually know what instruction he was supposed to receive. Dudden later received two PADI certifications based on the fatal dive: AOW and Deep.

The divers' set up on the beach was haphazard. No pre-dive briefing was given. No knowledge reviews were conducted. There was no dive plan expressed. No buddies were assigned, except that Nathan and Seth were told to go off and do something on their own. Bob Gentry and EG were set up and in the water first, and they waited for 30 minutes until Snow came in. At some point, the other divers entered the water. The first Gentry video shows Snow working solely with EG, dragging her down to approximately 20 feet while EG has difficulty with her ears and her buoyancy. Bob stayed on the surface and Linnea followed Snow and EG down and back up to the surface, at which point EG exits the water. EG was the only diver to exit the water. At this point, Snow directed Bob and Linnea to follow her. They submerged and went down the slope into deeper water. This account is based on multiple overlapping pieces of evidence, including: witness statements, both to us and statements made to the NPS; video and dive profiles. Most witnesses were interviewed twice by the NPS, on the night of the incident (the interviews were recorded on body cam video), and later by the NPS ISB (these interviews were recorded and transcribed).
12. Drowning was the cause of death. Dry suit squeeze was a disabling injury. Evidence of squeeze injuries was based on photos, video, eye-witness accounts, expert advice and an expert re-enactment. The gap on the zipper did not alleviate the squeeze, or at least not all or much of it, based on what the evidence clearly showed. Why the squeeze was not alleviated is open to debate. It could have been that the neoprene backing on the zipper prevented air from escaping, or the position of the zipper, the position of the air in the suit once she started to fall backwards or was positioned upright, pressure from the BCD, soaked clothing, or a myriad of other factors. Nevertheless, the fact is Linnea suffered from suit squeeze, particularly around her neck and in other areas.
13. No comment. For obvious reasons.

 

[Subfiend]

From what I understand, criminal charges can only be "personal", so the criminal action will be focused only on the instructor. Is this correct?
Sorry, but my understanding of US legal system is very limited.

Correct.

 

[MrVegas]

Just wanted to say thanks for providing the detailed responses to my questions. I was not trying to be argumentative -- I have no connection to the case at all other than curiosity. I'm just not quite ready to act as judge, jury, and executioner until both sides of the story are available. I also think people sometimes don't always understand the difficulty in proving each element of a negligence case no matter how obvious it may seem at the outset.

I see the moderators have flagged some of my other posts -- they can delete those if they want. This has answered most of my questions.