 |
AirTalk.org
Aviation discussions newsgroups
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Peter R.
Guest
|
 Posted: Sun May 13, 2007 6:12 am Post subject: Apartment dweller sues Cory Lidle's estate for destroying hi |
 |
|
A couple of weeks ago there was a thread about Cory Lidle's widow suing
Cirrus and a bunch of other deep pockets for damages after her husband's
Cirrus SR20 attempted to perform a 180 degree turn over the East River and
slammed into an apartment building on the east side of Manhattan, killing the
NY Yankees pitcher and a flight instructor.
Someone had posted a reply in that thread that outlined a scenario where an
apartment dweller in the damaged building sued the estate of the pitcher.
Looks like real life is imitating fiction:
From the USA Today's website, in part (copyright USAToday):
----------- start article quote:
Lidle estate sued over plane crash
(http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-05-12-cory-lidle-estate-lawsuit_N.htm?csp=34)
NEW YORK (AP) — Stephane Sparta was at home in his 31st floor apartment when
New York Yankees pitcher Cory Lidle's small plane crashed into the floor
below.
The plane didn't hit Sparta, "but it gave him quite a shock," said his
lawyer, David C. Cook. "It came as close to giving him a haircut as you can
get."
Sparta, an architect, has sued Lidle's estate, claiming his home was
destroyed and he was emotionally injured by the crash.
Sparta says in court papers that he was forced to abandon his apartment after
Lidle's Cirrus SR-20 plane crashed into the building on Manhattan's Upper
East Side on Oct. 11, 2006. Sparta's court papers say parts of the airplane
wreckage "exploded" into his living room, "setting the contents on fire and
otherwise destroying the apartment and the property therein."
-------------- end quote ---------------------
--
Peter |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Morgans
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun May 13, 2007 6:12 am Post subject: Re: Apartment dweller sues Cory Lidle's estate for destroyin |
|
|
"Peter R." <pjricc (AT) gmailX (DOT) com> wrote
| Quote: | Sparta says in court papers that he was forced to abandon his apartment
after
Lidle's Cirrus SR-20 plane crashed into the building on Manhattan's Upper
East Side on Oct. 11, 2006. Sparta's court papers say parts of the
airplane
wreckage "exploded" into his living room, "setting the contents on fire
and
otherwise destroying the apartment and the property therein."
|
At least there is some truth in that law suite.
He should be compensated, at least for the loss of his property; destroyed
due to an irresponsible act.
--
Jim in NC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Morgans
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 6:12 am Post subject: Re: Apartment dweller sues Cory Lidle's estate for destroyin |
|
|
"Dallas" <Cybnorm (AT) spam_me_not (DOT) Hotmail.Com> wrote in message
news:1e16vsr7atrf0.dwl12ldyy0ya$.dlg (AT) 40tude (DOT) net...
| Quote: | On Sun, 13 May 2007 12:40:00 GMT, B A R R Y wrote:
I agree that this is someone who deserves to be made whole.
I would think his homeowner's insurance would cover the damage and his
insurance carrier would sue Lidle's estate to get their money back.
The fact that he mentions "he was emotionally injured by the crash" leads
me to believe that he's trying to cash in on the accident.
|
So you don't think that he is due any "pain in the ass that this happen to
me" money?
I do.
--
Jim in NC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ron Natalie
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 6:12 am Post subject: Re: Apartment dweller sues Cory Lidle's estate for destroyin |
|
|
chris wrote:
\
| Quote: |
Isn't that what the apartment owner's insurance is for??? I mean, if
the crash was deliberate I could sort of understand it, but it was an
accident, after all..
No, it's what Lidle's liability insurance is for. Why should the |
homeowner's insurance be resonsible? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LWG
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 6:12 am Post subject: Re: Apartment dweller sues Cory Lidle's estate for destroyin |
|
|
Of course that's true. But if you are talking about property damage only,
most people would rather collect their damages than their damages minus
one-third, forty percent, or whatever your or your lawyer's time is worth.
| Quote: | That may be a possible entity, but there is no legal requirement
to hit them up first.
A similar thing happens with auto accidents. An insured's collison pay
for his damages without regard to the insured's fault. Payments between
companies are governed by intercompany arbitration agreements which
assess fault between different insureds involved in a collision, and the
process is almost invisible to the insured. In the event that the
insured is determined not to be at fault, he is reimbursed his
deductible.
There's no requirement that you file a claim with your own policy first
in most states (barring no-fault states). I am perfectly allowed to
go pursue the at-fault party without involving my insurance company
here in Virginia. My insurance company even tells me this when I
file the report. Frankly, I always let them do it. It's what I
pay them for, and if they can't collect I'm still eligible to pursue
it (the only downside is if they settle for less than what I wanted,
but that's never heappened).
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chris
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 6:12 am Post subject: Re: Apartment dweller sues Cory Lidle's estate for destroyin |
|
|
On May 17, 12:23 am, Ron Natalie <r...@spamcop.net> wrote:
| Quote: | LWG wrote:
The first entity responsible is the homeowner's insurance.
That may be a possible entity, but there is no legal requirement
to hit them up first.
A similar thing happens with auto accidents. An insured's collison pay for
his damages without regard to the insured's fault. Payments between
companies are governed by intercompany arbitration agreements which assess
fault between different insureds involved in a collision, and the process is
almost invisible to the insured. In the event that the insured is
determined not to be at fault, he is reimbursed his deductible.
There's no requirement that you file a claim with your own policy first
in most states (barring no-fault states). I am perfectly allowed to
go pursue the at-fault party without involving my insurance company
here in Virginia. My insurance company even tells me this when I
file the report. Frankly, I always let them do it. It's what I
pay them for, and if they can't collect I'm still eligible to pursue
it (the only downside is if they settle for less than what I wanted,
but that's never heappened).
|
See, now to me that sounds a bit bizarre, bearing in mind I am used to
things working quite differently, and I do live a long way from you)
For car accidents here, each party has to claim from his/her insurance
and the insurance companies sort it out with each other. Although, in
this country, because there is no requirement for you to have car
insurance of any kind, there are plenty of uninsured people running
around, and if one of the hits me, I will still claim off my
insurance, but the insurance company will take the uninsured person to
court to recover their costs. Which would probably be repaid $5 a
week if they're poor.. Which is why, if you are broke but not stupid,
you will have 3rd party insurance. However, if your car is not
registered or has no WOF (Warrant of Fitness - 6 monthly inspection),
they will probably get nasty with you if you stack into someone |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LWG
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri May 18, 2007 5:17 am Post subject: Re: Apartment dweller sues Cory Lidle's estate for destroyin |
|
|
The process is in fact quite similar to what you describe. What is lacking
in this discussion is common sense. Of course you can sue an adverse driver
for your property damage, and you don't have to make a claim against your
collision coverage. But why would you pay a lawyer a hundred or more
dollars per hour to do something your insurer is already obligated to do?
You may have a "choice" to collect $100 or $1000, but most people wouldn't
have to think long about which one they would take. So, no, here you don't
have to make a claim against your collision coverage, but you're nuts not to
(assuming you are not at fault, because then the concept of chargeable
occurrence comes into play). And yes, intercompany arbitration settles
between the companies who are signatory to the agreement.
Remember that in the case of personal injury, the process is different
(although the insurers may still be under a legal obligation to resolve
property damage claims promptly, despite the pendency of a personal injury
claim). Or, if you are involved in a collision with a self-insured vehicle,
that company may not be a signatory to the intercompany arbitration
agreement and you may have no option but to file suit. Or, you may not have
collision coverage on your vehicle.
| Quote: | The first entity responsible is the homeowner's insurance.
There's no requirement that you file a claim with your own policy first
in most states (barring no-fault states). I am perfectly allowed to
go pursue the at-fault party without involving my insurance company
here in Virginia. My insurance company even tells me this when I
file the report. Frankly, I always let them do it. It's what I
pay them for, and if they can't collect I'm still eligible to pursue
it (the only downside is if they settle for less than what I wanted,
but that's never heappened).
See, now to me that sounds a bit bizarre, bearing in mind I am used to
things working quite differently, and I do live a long way from you)
For car accidents here, each party has to claim from his/her insurance
and the insurance companies sort it out with each other. Although, in
this country, because there is no requirement for you to have car
insurance of any kind, there are plenty of uninsured people running
around, and if one of the hits me, I will still claim off my
insurance, but the insurance company will take the uninsured person to
court to recover their costs. Which would probably be repaid $5 a
week if they're poor.. Which is why, if you are broke but not stupid,
you will have 3rd party insurance. However, if your car is not
registered or has no WOF (Warrant of Fitness - 6 monthly inspection),
they will probably get nasty with you if you stack into someone
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matt Barrow
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat May 19, 2007 6:13 am Post subject: Re: Apartment dweller sues Cory Lidle's estate for destroyin |
|
|
"Grumman-581" <grumman581@DIE-SPAMMER-SCUM-gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8c2s43lg3b5vm909ignrkkhjglmi4fjkea (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...
| Quote: | On Mon, 14 May 2007 14:31:47 -0400, "Roger (K8RI)"
validaddress (AT) my (DOT) com> wrote:
Some years back, a couple I know quite well had decided to call it
quits. Neither was thrilled, but it was working out. Then some one
told them they needed to have lawyers involved. From there it went
down hill in a hurry and turned from at least a sort of amicable split
to...well... a real fight. Of course the lawyers ended up with about
a third of the settlement and they ended up with a lot of hard
feelings.
http://grumman581.googlepages.com/lawyer-problem-solution
|
Works for me! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
