Supreme Court on Prop Guards

[Jack Shellac]

Well, here we go. I see that the court has ruled that Mercury Marine can be sued in state court for having a defective motor because it had no prop guard. You'll remember that some moron in Illinois let his wife fall out of a ski boat and she was killed by the prop. Now he wants to sue Mercury for his negligence in not assuring the safety of his passengers. I guess we'll all eventually have cages around our props and there will be a lot of threads on how you keep them cleared of trash, how to unbend them, how to make your motor perform in spite of them, etc. The court made this ruling in spite of the fact that no guard is required by any state or federal regulation. Now some jury of people who will probably know absolutely nothing about boats will be deciding liability and awarding damages. The lawyers have got to be drooling and looking for a big payday.

 

[Ross J]

Re: Supreme Court on Prop Guards

Does that mean I can sue the manufacturer of my boat for not fitting brakes to it and having it ram a dock and sustain damage? Or could it possibly cover the event I beach my boat and my son gets nicked by something whilst pushing off the sand?<br />How ridiculous can it get. Is there not some limitation whereby one must assume the responsibility for the safety of all people aboard the boat. Over here in NZ the skipper is legally responsible for all folk aboard. It has been seen to be backed up in court and I think it works well. <br />I certainly don't know this dude and feel sorry his wife died in the accident, however I fail to see how it was the manufacturers fault.<br />Also if this is the way of the courts today then its a wonder there's any companies making Jet Skis.........<br />Ross

 

[roscoe]

Re: Supreme Court on Prop Guards

Does anyone have a link to this story?<br />Or the original story of the "accident"?<br />I am curious about the details.<br />Thanks.

 

[Jack Shellac]

Re: Supreme Court on Prop Guards

ROSS J: I like the idea of skippers being legally responsible for the occupants of the boat in NZ. That's the way it should be and we need it here. I see boats go by my wharf regularly with little kids sitting on the bow with their legs dangling over the front. Their idiot fathers run on without a thought that if they hit a submerged log or piling, their kids are going to squirt right out under the bow rail and then probably be run over by the boat. Then they'd want to sue somebody. It seems like responsibility for your own negligence is a thing of the past. It's always somebody else's fault.

 

[dkondelik]

Re: Supreme Court on Prop Guards

A little explaination.<br /><br />In the USA, if there is road construction, Sewer Repair, or anything that lends to a hole in the ground, All sorts of impassible barriers, signs and sometimes, even living-breathing "Guards" are in place to prevent someone from falling in, getting hurt, and Suing.<br /><br />In China, from what I have seen, if there is a hole in the ground as per above, people walk/ride/drive AROUND it. If you fall in, you get laughed at for being an IDIOT!<br /><br />Don't get me wrong. I love my country (more then ever after seeing other parts of the world). BUT, we really play to the lowest common denominator and assume that their is no such thing as "common sense". Perhaps it's because there is true evidence of the lack of common sense.<br /><br />Be that as it may, our tort system really has lowered the curve in terms of acceptable behavior. Fortunately, there are still MANY jurisdictions that are NOT stoned-out-of their-minds. The problem is, GOOD litigation/legislation doesn't get any coverage. Only the WACKO courts get any air-play. The problem is, case president allows the stupidity to proliferate. And thus, "It Aint My Fault" has become the rally cry of the lascivious losers all over this great land. How did Yogi put it? “If it weren’t for lawyers, we wouldn’t need ‘em”<br /><br />Hopefully, after the initial suit is settled (maybe in the 9th circuit), it will be immediately appealed and overturned in a more level-headed jurisdiction. Folks godda wake up! We are Responsible for what We do. The guy up the street didn’t make us do it.<br /><br />One last word about what I've seen of the Chinese legal system. If you are suspected, YES, SUSPECTED of drug trafficking, you have until the next morning to PROVE your innocence. Else,....a rifle but in the gut, and when you eel over from the pain,... Boom!,... a bullet in the head. End of problem. No 3-hot squares per day. No exercise room. No library. No appeals. No Counter suites. <br />And, for what it's worth. I Really admire this approach to dealing with this scum. I'd like to see something SIMILAR here.

 

[SpinnerBait_Nut]

Re: Supreme Court on Prop Guards

Yea that right up there with the Mc/Donalds hot coffee case. <br /><br />Thats all this world is anymore, is sue, sue, sue!!!!

 

[SpinnerBait_Nut]

Re: Supreme Court on Prop Guards

Oh I guess I can sue Bendix cause my stop light switch quit working and someone hit me in the rear. Just joking, but why not.<br /><br />All is fair game anymore.

 

[SpinnerBait_Nut]

Re: Supreme Court on Prop Guards

roscoe, heres a link to it if you can get the pdf to work right.<br /> merc case

 

[dkondelik]

Re: Supreme Court on Prop Guards

ooo! oh - ohohoh!!!<br />I know I KNOW!<br />Spinner,<br /><br />cuz yer bedder then that. That's why.

 

[roscoe]

Re: Supreme Court on Prop Guards

Thanks SBN, that some heavy reading, but some interesting reading. I will have to save some of it for tomorrow.<br /><br />It seems the goofball violated several laws in the moments leading up to this "accident?" <br /><br />If reckless endangerment is a felony, then this would be felony murder. Lock him up.<br /><br />I can't wait for my new boat. It will have airbags, lap and shoulder restraints, sealed hardtop, 24 hours of emergengy oxygen, brakes, bumpers, brakelights, signal lights and 4-way flashers, steel reinforced hull sidewalls, maximun speed of 2 knots, and a video system that will play movies of people water skiing (soon to be illegal?).<br /><br />The Court did not find Brunswick Corporation, parent company of the defendant, Mercury Marine, to be liable for the incident that led to this case; this ruling allows the case to move forward in the Illinois state court. The Court also did not comment on the appropriateness of propeller guards. To read the complete Supreme Court decision, visit http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/01-706.ZO.html. <br /><br />Opinion of the Court:<br /><br /> http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/01-706.ZO.html <br /><br />Brunswick Virtual Prop Guard:<br /> http://www.delphion.com/details?pn=US06354892__ <br /><br />Does this mean that we need tire guards for our cars??

 

[sloopy]

Re: Supreme Court on Prop Guards

I will post a pic here in a second. it is funny from the army core about the boating thing!

 

[SpinnerBait_Nut]

Re: Supreme Court on Prop Guards

Yea, if anyone rides in my boat, I feel I am responsible for them and thats why when someone gets onboard, they put a life jacket on when we start to get underway. If they don't then they get out, plain and simple. <br /><br />That goes for you too sloopy. <br /><br />You have got to draw the line somewhere with this stuff or we won't be able to buy a boat for all the cost of safety features.

 

[Ross J]

Re: Supreme Court on Prop Guards

I hear you Spinner_bait Nut, down here I too have some rules for the boat. My 1st rule states (and is printed for all to see) "If you won't wear a life jacket please inform the skipper so he can drop you off at the nearest jetty!"<br />Thus far no one has refused.<br /><br />A while ago a NZ famous fishing personality was charged over the death of a fisherman who didn't wear a life jacket on his boat. The fisherman was offered a jacket as was the policy on that boat however he declined. The court found the skipper negligent and he was given a set punishment. He still works and runs a successful buisiness however he will forever carry the official blame for the fishermans death. Not an easy load.<br />A lot of fishermen felt for the skipper and expressed their feelings on an NZ web site.<br /><br />No one at all gets onto my boat and dosen't wear a life jacket and has also to put up with a short "airxraft" type banter about safety. Especially when I get to the part about "emergency exits". My mates think I've made it into a most entertaining joke, however before they realise it they are all aware where the fire extinguisher, first aid kit, ignition kill, and spare parts are kept. Now they also do the same thing.<br /><br />It's my bloody boat, and I'm not going to prison for some other fools actions........<br />Ross

 

[SpinnerBait_Nut]

Re: Supreme Court on Prop Guards

Good point ross.<br /><br />My 3 girls growed up on boats and they know the rules.<br /><br />Now when the grandkids come for an afternoon on the bassboat or pontoon, the first thing they ask is "Where are the life jackets paw-paw?"<br /><br />The oldest, which is 12 don't even ask any more, he just goes for one cause he knows where I keep them.<br /><br />I'm with you, if they don't want to wear one, they can fish from the bank.

 

[ebbtide176]

Re: Supreme Court on Prop Guards

too bad about that propguard issue. its been a heavy contested thing with activists for at least as long as i've been here. back when i first heard of a propgd, i ran a web search and came across the activists sites. many people get hurt by props nationwide, especially skiiers. but they should know the propeller is there, and dangerous. <br />i don't think making boatmotors all have a propguard is fair. what is next, covers on bicycle spokes, chainsaws, drills, and airplane props?<br />i do feel very sorry for the loss of life, though. i didn't read the whole story, but the old stories i read of could of all been considered plain & simple accidents. like falling off a ladder...

 

[SpinnerBait_Nut]

Re: Supreme Court on Prop Guards

Hey roscoe, went and checked out the virtual prop guard thingy. <br /><br />Now I know infrared is fast, but if your are going WOT and someone falls off the front of the boat, it is not going to be fast enough before said person gets to prop.

 

[roscoe]

Re: Supreme Court on Prop Guards

I didn't think much of it either, but Brunswick has a patent on it. And it has to be one heck of an infrared sensor to pick up a warm body with all that water.<br /><br />It might work for a bow thruster in a manatee zone.

 

[SpinnerBait_Nut]

Re: Supreme Court on Prop Guards

I bet that is what all this is about, "Protect the manatees" J/K<br /><br />Yea, I seen where they had a patent for it.<br />Can you imagine what that will cost? <br /><br />Maybe it's gona double for a high tech fish finder too. <br /><br />If it can detect a body moving that fast from a WOT boat, I know it can detect a slow moving fish.