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.
The parents' description of events is different from what the media reported initially. We will have to see how that plays out.
I am sure there will be a settlement. I am not convinced the restaurant should have known that a child would crawl behind one of the booths and get his head stuck.
Exactly.
The parents were sitting at a table eating lunch, 30 feet away from where their child was allowed to crawl around on the floor and underneath tables.
The view is from the windows, on the outside perimeter of the restaurant, not on the inside wall where the floor moves alongside it.
I also WONDER whether this is a restaurant expecting kids. Here is a link to the lunch menu (they were having lunch): Lunch Menu - Sun Dial Restaurant Yes, kids can eat steak tartare and blackened trout, but the menu seems designed for upscale adults, not 5 year olds. As far as I can tell, there's no kids menu.
It is not a kid-friendly restaurant to be certain. It's extremely expensive and there is no kids menu. The eyewitnesses were floored that the parents would even bring a child in the first place, but to allow him to go off and play was beyond ridiculous.
The tragedy of this suit is that the Sun Dial will have to pay these leeches off.
This story presents a very compelling, different picture. I think I get it now.
So this floor rotates around a central column, as we all know. And there are gaps in the central column allowing for waitstaff to move in and out of the kitchen, for patrons to come in and out of the restaurant. Where the furniture is, relative to those large gap doorways changes over time. The restaurant moves slowly slowly slowly around the central core column.
There are times when the back of this booth is completely unobstructed. When the family arrived at the restaurant maybe an hour prior, they entered the restaurant and got to their table by going around the back of this booth. So at that time it was unobstructed.
The boy tried to retrace his path to the door by again going around the booth, but by that time there was a kind of narrow gap behind the booth, as the booth approached the critical total pinchpoint. The boy got a little stuck, and maybe didn't immediately try to back out, but kept trying to go forward and wiggle through and no one realized fully what was about to happen. As he struggled and struggled in this kind of narrow gap, the gap got critically horribly narrow and he became so stuck at that point adults helping couldn't free him. It was probably minutes more before the other patrons and staff fully engaged to get him out, and it was a half hour before he was finally out. So what began as a slightly stuck boy that could have been rescued had he been forcefully and quickly pulled backwards to retrace his steps, was eventually crushed.
So. Of course this would be a known hazard. If the booth goes from completely unobstructed to a pinchpoint, of course the staff knew about it. Of course there would have been food carts left behind the booth by inexperienced staff that crashed to the floor when they hit the pinch. Of course there were groups of patrons assembled behind the booth for a photo op when oh no this isn't going to work.
The rotation is so very slow that groups assembled to take photos would have had plenty of time to react.
This was a perfect storm. This gap was exactly at the right stage - big enough for an adventurous boy to think he could squeeze through, but too small for him to actually make it, and the gap was closing.
If there is a rendering of the layout showing exactly step by step in the different stages of rotation I would want to see it--- based on the report it was a tiny space of only few inches in behind a booth, I would disagree with the opinion that it would be an obvious hazard--
Was it a stated fact or was that something that you came to conclude that the boy allegedly continued to try and go deeper into the crevice rather than back out, (when he initially stepped into the crevice)??
As far as a scenario where a food cart may have been tipped over, or not, I don't think a food cart being tipped over by movement would translate to "a person will be able to fit inside there"
It is not a kid-friendly restaurant to be certain. It's extremely expensive and there is no kids menu. The eyewitnesses were floored that the parents would even bring a child in the first place, but to allow him to go off and play was beyond ridiculous.
The tragedy of this suit is that the Sun Dial will have to pay these leeches off.
Just because they don't post a kids menu, doesn't mean there isn't one.
Can you post some reliable sources that have unbiased witnesses claiming he was crawling under tables and running all over?
As the owner of an upscale restaurant for many years,we got sick of peoples children being allowed to run unsupervised through the house when people were dining.s
I don't even allow my 5 or 3 year old to get up from the table at HOME until their meal is finished and they have taken their plates back to the kitchen.
They sure as heck are NOT allowed to wander around a restaurant.
Also, they don't order the crap off the kids' menu anywhere.
Yes, there is a kid's menu, and crayons were provided with that kid menu.
According to the lawsuit and photos, the parents were leaving the restaurant with the daughter being carried, and Charlie walking with them when he walked around the booth the other way.
Also being sued are the managers, who warned waitstaff to be aware of the pinch point.
This probably had never been a serious accident before because a 5 year old would have less judgement about how small a space he could get through, and at the time, it was only a tiny bit too small. His body fit in, but not easily back out, when he entered it.
It is not a kid-friendly restaurant to be certain. It's extremely expensive and there is no kids menu. The eyewitnesses were floored that the parents would even bring a child in the first place, but to allow him to go off and play was beyond ridiculous.
The tragedy of this suit is that the Sun Dial will have to pay these leeches off.
There is a kid's menu. It's clearly posted on their website. For both lunch and dinner.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mondayafternoons
If there is a rendering of the layout showing exactly step by step in the different stages of rotation I would want to see it--- based on the report it was a tiny space of only few inches in behind a booth, I would disagree with the opinion that it would be an obvious hazard--
Was it a stated fact or was that something that you came to conclude that the boy allegedly continued to try and go deeper into the crevice rather than back out, (when he initially stepped into the crevice)??
As far as a scenario where a food cart may have been tipped over, or not, I don't think a food cart being tipped over by movement would translate to "a person will be able to fit inside there"
I only found one layout showing the accident path. It clearly shows multiple pinch points. Based on the drawing the space was not a tiny space to start with, but became one as the restaurant turned creating the pinch point. It's not something I'd expect a restaurant patron or staff to recognize as a hazard, but would expect a safety engineer during the design of rotating machinery, which is what this is, restaurant or not, to pick up on. Was a hazard analysis done during design? Or was the design changed after the engineer stamped the plans?
This will be a lot more complicated than first glance, because the restaurant will probably point toward the building owner, who will point toward the architect, who will point toward the engineer.
Status:
"This too shall pass. But possibly, like a kidney stone."
(set 9 days ago)
35,948 posts, read 18,257,705 times
Reputation: 51029
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnff
There is a kid's menu. It's clearly posted on their website. For both lunch and dinner.
I only found one layout showing the accident path. It clearly shows multiple pinch points. Based on the drawing the space was not a tiny space to start with, but became one as the restaurant turned creating the pinch point. It's not something I'd expect a restaurant patron or staff to recognize as a hazard, but would expect a safety engineer during the design of rotating machinery, which is what this is, restaurant or not, to pick up on. Was a hazard analysis done during design? Or was the design changed after the engineer stamped the plans?
This will be a lot more complicated than first glance, because the restaurant will probably point toward the building owner, who will point toward the architect, who will point toward the engineer.
Of course they are. Never sue just one person. You sue the entire chain of people because when you are looking for a payday, someone is bound to pay up.
Unless the restaurant expressly prohibited children, then the child had a right to be there. Besides, lots of people take their children to nice restaurants to expose them to a certain kind of fine dining and social etiquette. It's not like they were trying to host a kid's birthday party there with lots of other five year olds. They were just taking their one child there.
Indeed. Where I live, we have lots of children. I am hard pressed to think of any restaurant where you can't bring a child. Restaurants here know that if they had such a prohibition they would drive a large customer base away. I'm not saying I recommend it, but I've seen people here take their children to some of the most expensive and exclusive restaurants in the area.
Of course, there should have been a big sign up prohibiting children if the restaurant felt their presence was inappropriate. Of course, its the restaurant's problem if they fail to have such an express prohibition.
I see many issues and possible avenues for liability here.
1. The restaurant may have been badly designed from a safety standpoint by the architects and/or engineers who put the plans together.
2. Whoever set up the tables and furniture in the restaurant may not have considered safety issues.
3. The restaurant owner may never have had anyone routinely inspect the restaurant for these kinds of safety issues.
How common is it to take your child to a restaurant and have something like this happen? Its very uncommon. Its why the duty falls on the owner of the premises to prevent such occurrences.
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.
