Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I live in the area and there was plenty of coverage about this incident. This restaurant with its unique revolving design is the only one in Atlanta. Another building like it more than likely could never be built. The view and the revolving floor provide the reason for the restaurant's location. There is no other place where it could move to with the ambiance and gorgeous 360 degree view of the city.
The revolving design isn't unique to Atlanta. Polaris (at the Hyatt Regency) also rotates, altho it's more of a lounge now than a restaurant. What makes The Sun Dial unique is the combination of rotating design and the spectacular view. And I agree that we would never see its like again in Atlanta if it were to close.
I know the restaurant is open again, but according to the website it isn't currently rotating. Can someone confirm this? The accident was in April of this year.
No, it's actually not. And you may definitely win a lawsuit over it, but that's irrelevant. If you can't navigate a cracked piece of pavement without injuring yourself and then blame someone else for it, then the reality is you probably should not be walking. Anywhere. Ever. But I get that there are lots of people who have been conditioned by lawyers to believe that unless the world is constructed of completely smooth surfaces with no grade and no objects in your way that someone is to blame if anything ever happens.
By the way, I think it's funny that you claim that a 3 inch elevation in a sidewalk is grounds for anything. You know what you do when you encounter a 3 inch elevation in a sidewalk? You lift your leg 3 inches. It's like magic.
I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but you do admit that in practice those injured will win a lawsuit.
Maybe you should work backwards from there and realize that maybe others here are not wrong?
Granted, I only took one class in Civil Law in college, out of interest, I'm not a lawyer. But here's a standard measure in tort law - did the person have permission to use the equipment, was it being used as intended, did a fault in the equipment cause a significant injury and did the establishment know that the fault existed and was a potential danger.
And if you disagree with that, you're the one who's wrong, smartypants. ;D
Did Disney close down after parents left their very young child unsupervised and he was dragged by a crocodile underwater and drowned. No, Disney made safety changes, but thousands of people and children were not denied the enjoyment of the park.
Walt Disney World as a whole did not close (it's a huge place, by the way), but the beach where the accident occurred was closed, along with a similar beach across the lake.
I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but you do admit that in practice you will win a lawsuit.
That is correct, but "winning a lawsuit" doesn't mean "is right." It just means that I can find a place in America where 12 people don't know how to function in the world. That's what it boils down to. I constantly use this example, but you know how shampoo bottles will say "not for internal use"? That's because someone sued. And you'd be like "yeah, the manufacturers need to tell me that, what kind of negligent behavior is that all about?" Or like if you put a fork into an electrical outlet and are injured, some people will say "I can't believe that they'd make something dangerous where a fork can fit into it! I need to get a lawyer involved!" I acknowledge that there are indeed many many people who think in that manner. That's irrelevant to whether they are right or not. The reality is they win lawsuits based on claiming that they are completely and totally incompetent people at life. Like "I can't figure out how to walk in the real world, so someone should pay me money." OK.
No, it's actually not. And you may definitely win a lawsuit over it, but that's irrelevant. If you can't navigate a cracked piece of pavement without injuring yourself and then blame someone else for it, then the reality is you probably should not be walking. Anywhere. Ever. But I get that there are lots of people who have been conditioned by lawyers to believe that unless the world is constructed of completely smooth surfaces with no grade and no objects in your way that someone is to blame if anything ever happens.
By the way, I think it's funny that you claim that a 3 inch elevation in a sidewalk is grounds for anything. You know what you do when you encounter a 3 inch elevation in a sidewalk? You lift your leg 3 inches. It's like magic.
Says who? You? The law says otherwise when a city had actual or constructive notice of a defect in the walkway and does nothing about it after a reasonable period of time.
I am interested in the way the law views these things. Your personal opinion is not particularly relevant to me.
Except you don't want to close down just one restaurant. You want to close down any restaurant where there is the slightest remote risk of something bad happening. And that is all restaurants. A child could climb onto a chair, topple over, and break his neck. A child could start running, run into a waiter, and have ten bowls of scalding soup dumped on him. A child could run and trip and hit his head on a sharp or hard object.
The analogy is that in all those activities there is a slight risk that something could happen. There is no feasible way to prevent it 100% without getting rid of the activity.
Nobody has proposed such silliness. That was your strawman argument.
So our local McDonalds had an outdoor playscape in the early 1990s. One of the features was a little two story playscape, with the top platform being about 5.5 feet above the ground. The top platform had a roof and guardrails spaced so kids could see out but not fall out. Well done. But in the center of this was a fireman's pole. Kids loved it. You could climb up there and grab the pole and slide down just like a fireman. But injuries happened. Kids tried to climb UP when a kid was sliding down. Some kids lost grip and fell. After a number of injuries, mostly just scuffs, corporate told them to take out the firepole.
So they did. They removed the firepole. But left the gaping hole.
As it was configured, a parent new to the playscape couldn't see from their vantage point that there was a hole in the second floor. Just suddenly, little ones who were believed to be safe up there would fall through.
??? Yes, a child was severely injured and sued and won. What was this management thinking?
It's true.
In this case. there was a gap, I'm sure it was a known gap, and I don't know what they could have done to mitigate the danger of the gap...but sometimes freak things happen, too. Like all the signs and ropes and people still fall into holes in hot springs, etc.
The same precaution around the perimeter of the rotating platform as zoning laws require for decks would be reasonable. Works for decks, works for the edge of Niagra Falls. Not infallible, but reasonable, feasible, and usually effective enough...more effective than nothing.
People who know how to function in the real world. So not lawyers.
Actually, that's not true. Lawyers know how to function in the real world. But they know that they can make money by representing people who do not. So they basically feign that they understand like "omg, can you believe this sidewalk had a crack?? How can someone walk over a crack?? It's inconceivable! Also, what if they stepped on it and their mother's back broke, as per the nursery rhyme??" That kind of thing. It's why people laugh at lawyers all the time.
Those are not good analogies. Seeing one restaurant close down is not the same as seeing every restaurant close down. Do you see the fault in your argument?
Also, tons of restaurants around. It's a hugely competitive type of business. There are hundreds of restaurants in my own city. One of them closing down wouldn't make much difference.
How many rotating restaurants in your town? Most "towns" have only 1 or none. If you close down 1 in a town, you close down the possibility of ever having that experience.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
