Quote:
Originally Posted by beauvanlaanen
The chick that got thrown off the building has to be at fault a little bit, right?
It's not like she was being tossed against her will, she clearly wanted to do it.
I'm sure Blitz can afford some quality lawyers so I think he will be fine.
His homeowner's liability insurance company will wind up paying, if only to save money on lawyer's fees. She will sue, the insurance company has to be notified, (just as with a car accident), and they will handle the case (which will almost definitely be settled out of court, probably in the low 5-figures).
As far as the actual liability, he is at fault. My understanding is that she was there for a photo shoot for a magazine. Assuming that is correct, the company that brought her there for that photo shoot is also legally liable because the work environment they brought her to turned out to be dangerous. Unless she signed a waiver, she had a legal presumption that Blitz and the people conducting the shoot would not put her in danger (without regard to how dangerous such a thing might look to outsiders - there are many things done for photo shoots that appear dangerous but are not).
Liability laws are incredibly broad. Burglars have successfully sued property owners for injuries sustained
while breaking in. Mail carriers and other delivery people have sued homeowners for slips/falls while delivering. There are countless more examples. She will be paid, but by his/the magazine's insurance company (not by his father's ill-gotten gains). Pretty standard stuff.
Last edited by cwazy; 05-05-2014 at 01:03 PM.