Woman Killed in Tough Man Competition ???

[Oso]

Waiting for the rest of the story now on GMA.

Anyone got any more details?

[Oso]

per GMA:

30 year old mother of 2 sustained severe trauma to the brain causing bleeding and swelling. She was taken to a hospital and eventually placed on life support but was later pronounced brain dead.

The family's lawyer will be pursuing the case based on the lack of "informed consent".

He seemed to be stating that "Toughman" needed to be more forthcoming about the inherent danger of the contest. According to GMA there have been 4 deaths in the last 3 months.

These are the Toughman events promoted by Dore.

[shaolin kungfu]

Yeah, I just read that too courtesy of the aol pop up thingy. She did sign a waver releasing the promoters from any legal responsibility. So they'll probably have a tough time taking legal action.

[Judge Pen]

Originally posted by shaolin kungfu
Yeah, I just read that too courtesy of the aol pop up thingy. She did sign a waver releasing the promoters from any legal responsibility. So they'll probably have a tough time taking legal action.

Anyone can bring legal action. Prevailing is another matter. Plus, waivers are narrowly construed and the case law differs from state to state so her family may have a cause of action. It will still be a tough case though.

[ewallace]

Those kinds of lawsuits are bs. It's almost insulting to the deceased. She knew the dangers. She signed the waiver. I doubt that a lawsuit is what she would have wanted. Sure it's tragic, but she knew what could happen going in to it. If the case goes to trial, I hope the family loses.

[Shaolin-Do]

Yeah, its sad that it happened, sucks for the family, but the woman DID sign the consent form... If she didnt know the dangers, shouldnt have signed it. People are always looking for an excuse to sue...

[red5angel]

I am with ewallace these lawsuits are crap. I am sick of this scoiety protecting the weak and the stupid. For instance, I now have to walk an extra quarter mile, and tack on 15 extra minuts on a 45 minute bus trip in the morning because they shut down my bus stop. Their reasoning? becuase too many people were crossing the street in the wrong place instead of walking the extra 20 feet to the crosswalk. I told the lady who did the poll that as far as I was concerned let em get hit, it solves a lot of issues that way.

[Judge Pen]

I agree with you guys. I am in the business of defending these types of lawsuits and I think that personal responsibility is often swept under the rug by creative plaintiff's attorneys with an agenda and a contingency fee arrangement. I was just saying that there are ways that these lawsuits get around consent forms and personal responsibility.

People are way to sue happy. I shouldn't complain too much because if people stopped suing then I wouldn't have any cases to defend.

[MasterKiller]

JP,

What's the success rate of law suits like this?

[Judge Pen]

Originally posted by MasterKiller
JP,

What's the success rate of law suits like this?

Well if settling the case out of court because insurance companies are afraid of the potential exposure of a large jury verdict, then fairly high. Unfortunately, the families are not usually happy with the settlement and feel pressured into it because they don't understand the risks involved. The defense attorneys like me aren't happy with the settlement because we feel like we can win on this issue whether it be in front of a jury or a judge on a summary judgment motion. The plaintiff's attorneys are happy because they get a third (or more) for a limited amount of work.

That's just my jaded opinion. If it does not settle, then most of these cases will be dismissed on summary judgment. The vast majority do, unfortunately, settle.

[sweaty_dog]

I am against stupid lawsuits for people spilling coffee on themselves, but actively persuading people to get in the ring is something else. Some sports require people to have blood tests and medical evaluations before they can get in the ring, but for some reason Toughman is allowed to talk drunk people into getting in the ring and fighting. Sure it was her decision but talking about "the weak and the stupid" when a mother of two has just died is pretty **** harsh. She made an error of judgement. I doubt if someone had told her "Hey we've had a lot of people dieing lately, I hope you've got a will" she would have got in there. Not to say her family deserves compensation but I won't be crying if the cowboys that make money out of this stuff get sued.

[Judge Pen]

Originally posted by sweaty_dog
I am against stupid lawsuits for people spilling coffee on themselves, but actively persuading people to get in the ring is something else. Some sports require people to have blood tests and medical evaluations before they can get in the ring, but for some reason Toughman is allowed to talk drunk people into getting in the ring and fighting. Sure it was her decision but talking about "the weak and the stupid" when a mother of two has just died is pretty **** harsh. She made an error of judgement. I doubt if someone had told her "Hey we've had a lot of people dieing lately, I hope you've got a will" she would have got in there. Not to say her family deserves compensation but I won't be crying if the cowboys that make money out of this stuff get sued.

Sd,

Are you a creative plaintiff's attorney because you just made their typical argument. "Save me from my own bad judgment; or at least pay me for my mistake." Should we reward bad judgment? Do you know whether she was drunk and cooerced? Do you know what the consent form said? I don't, but I can almost guarentee that it pointed out the risk of death or serious bodily injury. If she was too drunk to read and understand the form then that may be different, but if she could read and understand then its her own fault.

I'm not condoning the Tough Man competition. I could care less if it was in business or not. It just baffles me that people want to blame someone else for their own stupidity.

The coffee case is a whole other thread.

[red5angel]

I'm not condoning the Tough Man competition

This brings up something, here is my feeling on this sort of thing. As long as you are not hurting anyone else, I think people should be allowed to do whatever they want. If you want to do a Tough man competition then so be it, but take some accountability. You bought the coffee, you spilled it in your car, probably while driving mind you, so take some responsibility or get out of the pool.

[M.C. Busman]

Here's a link I found relating this incident.

http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/talla...al/6111468.htm

Despite the general term "Toughman" contest, note she was boxing another female, and not a man. Her opponent was smaller than her, and apparently neither woman had any kind of training in boxing.

Obviously there are inherent risks in contact sports. Boxing is a contact sport--everyone knows that occasionally boxers, pro and amateur, suffer serious injury or death from blows to the head.

A release form is designed to protect the promoter by stipulating to the participant's awareness of inherent dangers existant in the execution of certain activities. This in and of itself does not mean a promoter may not have been negligent in some other matter. We'll have to wait for the facts on this one to determine whether the promotor was negligent (proper equipment, full medical exams for participants to determine suitability--pro boxers must go through this--, etc.).

While I myself roll my eyes over people who try to collect on what I like to refer to as the common sense deficiency factor (such as placing hot coffee in one's crotch without considering what might happen during a spill--c'mon, people, really!!) + deep pockets, judgements usually consider more than the mere foolishness of individual upon whose behalf the complain was issued. It is a fine line between being just and supporting Social Darwinism.

The lawyers are ostensibly fighting for the support of this woman's survuiving children--victims of mom's stupidity, and peripherally perhaps, of a promoter's desire to make a living. 'Course, they'll get at least 50% of whatever $ is stipulated in the case of a judgement, + fees....

[Oso]

a couple of things were said this morning that bothered me about it and did make me thing that maybe there was some coercion from Toughman:

They had a female fighter who did not have a bout.

They waived the entry fee for the deceased woman.

It sounds like there is a definite possibility that they needed a woman to fight and did there best to convince someone to do it.

It also sounded like it was a huge mismatch and that the other fighter had some experience.

another thought was that it definitely sounds like poor officiating. A good ref or ringside Dr. should be able to spot a potentially harmfull blow. Something was said about reviewing the tape and that they could tell by her gait that the bad hit happened early.

Is it onus not on the ref and ringside Dr. to protect the combatants? In Boxing and MMA events it seems like they are calling the bout a lot more conservatively than in past decades. Should Toughman not have at least the same protective standards as any other legit venue?