Jump to content

YEA / Cadets Injury Lawsuit


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Spatzzz said:

Had they handled it better it would not have made its way to the public in the manner it did. That is a fact you cannot ignore. I guess you can but you'd be wrong.

Maybe the words 'have not met the light of day' were not the best and should have been stated the it would not have been the public relations disaster it was due to ineffective management of the situation when it happened. That ineffective management falls at the feet of the corps director at the time does it not?

Cadets could have done everything right, exactly right by your definition, and the plaintiff could have still filed his suit and made his claims.

The Cadets "doing everything right" has no impact, zero, nada, none on the motivations of the person filing the suit.  You simply cannot claim that, had Cadets done anything differently, much less the way you'd envision them acting, the plaintiff would not have filed suit.

Once it's filed, it's public unless the court says otherwise.

What you don't seem to be grasping is that people make false claims in lawsuits all the time even when the actions of the other party are recognized as "common".

Again, isn't it better, and simply more human, to wait until the counter-case is presented before proclaiming the defendant acted egregiously?

"I presume you've never been [a lawyer} in your life, ever."  Yet, here you are playing one on DCP.  Anonymously!  Yea!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Spatzzz said:

Come on people. There were two issues that happened in the last 2 years(2018 sexual assault amongst members and 2019 worker injured) that would have never made the light of day had the previous director and admin (not the people just put in place) would have handled them better at the time they occurred.

I get that people want Cadets to get past the issues but in order to do that they need to as they stated in the 2019 production and "Do, do, do, do better". I think they have the right people in place to do that now but that doesn't erase the mistakes of the past director and admin. Sorry.

Not sure I agree that these two issues “would not have made the light of day.”

The sexual assault in 2018, and the injury lawsuit are apples and oranges and not a pattern of behavior.

If the victim’s mother’s letter and the drama that followed on Facebook, DCP, and Reddit are where you are drawing your conclusions on the sexual assault case, you need to remember that law enforcement was involved and there is only so much Cadets can say about the situation. This does not exonerate Cadets but it doesn’t point blame either.

Regarding the lawsuit, sounds more like ambulance chasing lawyers than bad faith on the part of the Cadets. He deserves compensation, no question, but lawsuits such as this are pretty common, and far too many personal injury lawyers have already spent the 1/3rd of the settlement proceeds that are their due.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Spatzzz said:

A pattern of not handling situations that require some type of administrative intelligence very well. That pattern. Also a pattern of 'supporters' making excuses for them. Don't expect everyone to agree but it's there.

Uh no. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/13/2019 at 12:19 PM, IllianaLancerContra said:

Looks like YEA / Cadets are being sued over a workplace accident last summer.

 

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16135225/1/antonelli-v-youth-education-in-the-arts/

 

Note - as actual court documents (with names) have been filed I don't think this falls under the 'undocumented accusation' aegis.

I re-read this thing because, well, life and I have a few questions.

Plaintiff was directed to paint the A/C cover on the staff vehicle; was he also instructed HOW to paint it?  Does it matter (probably a legal question)?  Isn't the primary issue one of Workers Compensation under the contract agreement signed by both parties?  Presuming Cadets have maintained their obligations under payments into the system, isn't Workers Comp payments the source of the funds to pay for his care?  Isn't the investigation by the PA Worker's Comp Admin the determiner of whether they pay for plaintiff's care or Cadets' liability insurance pays?

Other than affecting their insurance premiums (potentially significantly), unless they can be proven negligent in providing the tools and safety equipment to accomplish his maintenance duties, I don't see how this affects Cadets too much.

Obviously, lots of hair on the issue, like whether painting the A/C unit mid-season introduced unnecessary liability risk to the org, but negligence laws of insurance lays a determined level of responsibility on the employee for following practices that put himself in danger.  And no, I don't believe anyone at Cadets would dare risk threatening the plaintiff with his job if he didn't paint the A/C cover if he didn't feel safe doing so.  This is not an inexperience minor doing this job.

Practicing law on DCP is probably not wise, but I sure can speculate that Cadets come out of this with, at worst, a small and temporary financial cost.

EDIT:  Just did some digging for fun, and PA is a Modified Comparative Negligence state meaning, if both plaintiff and defendant contributed to the circumstances of his accident, blame is assigned in a percentage.  So long as the plaintiff didn't contribute more than the "line in the sand" percentage established in state law, negligence is shared.  If it's determined that the plaintiff contributed more than the "line in the sand" amount to his own accident, he gets no negligence award.

I don't know what the "line in the sand" percentage is in PA.  Considering his job was not jeopardized by refusing to paint the cover, and considering his painting the cover was not an essential function to the operation of the Cadets, I would certainly make a big issue out of the fact that plaintiff climbed the ladder under no duress and was equally contributory to his accident.

This is all for liability and, I also presume, doesn't apply to the costs of his medical care, all of which was presumably paid by Cadets insurance.

 

Edited by garfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

unfortunately, there were several cadets supporters on here who immediately dismissed the gh sexual assault accusations as bs. 

some deleted or altered their comments later on, but that doesn't mean they didn't happen.  

little relevance to situation in this thread, though.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Spatzzz said:

Where in the world did you pull this from Jeff? I never stated that they should have made them public or anything about outing people for anything. I have stated that there is no reason for them to become public if they had handled them better internally. How you arrived where you arrived on this is just odd.

your own words. thanks for playing.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Spatzzz said:

Had they handled it better it would not have made its way to the public in the manner it did. That is a fact you cannot ignore. I guess you can but you'd be wrong.

Maybe the words 'have not met the light of day' were not the best and should have been stated the it would not have been the public relations disaster it was due to ineffective management of the situation when it happened. That ineffective management falls at the feet of the corps director at the time does it not?

I stopped reading after you tried to pass off your personal speculation as "fact".

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

I stopped reading after you tried to pass off your personal speculation as "fact".

Yep... Lot of ways to handle... and if they would have buried the mutha no one would have known so no PR problems.

At this point we don’t have all the details and doubt if either side should give out too much until it runs its course in the legal system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...