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.
Nobody would go to a restaurant thinking their child's head could get crushed. I don't see where the parents did anything wrong. It is a bizarre accident that obviously resulted from the faulty design of the restaurant. The hazard should have been noticed a long time ago. I also don't see the parents as greedy. I'm sure they'd much rather skip the lawsuit if they could have their son back.
I wanted to find a clear layout like a rendering of the floor plan, the floor design, where and how far apart the booths are, with a type of view to see with the rotation how it changes and would appear, the so called pathway that had an unobstructed back upon getting there and then was partly closed as they left -- I still however if its true as all accounts state that the space was a 4-5 inch gap, then I tend to think that is the part I am having a hard time feeling the restaurant (or anyone, apparently even the parents) would have reasonably expected it to be a hazard so dangerous it could kill someone.
Last edited by mondayafternoons; 11-21-2017 at 03:49 PM..
Your Air Force training is interesting. The Air Force flies planes. Planes can crash. Perhaps every plane needs not only an ejection seat (to save the pilot), but also a deployable "landing cushion" that can be dropped by the same lever that ejects the pilot. Oh, but you have to assure the landing cushion lands under the plane, so weights have to be attached and it must be tethered to the plane. Oh, but people could be crushed on the ground by the landing cushion, so you have to deploy "gentle sweepers" that will 1)make it to the ground before the plane and 2)gently guide people out of the way of the landing cushion. Then you have to assure those gentle sweepers don't land on someone, so you have to devise a device that gets to the ground faster than the gentle sweeper, alerts the person on the ground to watch out, and points the correct direction. Then you have to hope your plane can get off the ground with all these safety devices. 'Course, if the plane is grounded, perhaps that's the safest outcome.
We prioritize. It is impossible to put barriers everywhere something bad can happen. There seems no way to put a barrier where people are suggesting one is needed. That impossibility probably mitigates (to some extent) some of any remaining proprietor liability.
You're missing the point entirely, have you served in the military? In the military there are constant and endless risks, in combat and not. Yes, they do imagine scenarios of all kinds because the hardware costs millions of dollars and thousands of dollars go into training a specialist to carry out operations. You don't leave all of that expense to chance of something simple that got overlooked.
I imagine since the restaurant has been in business for over 40 years, it has seen several transformations that were not considered in the original design. I can also imagine that the subsequent designs were more cosmetic than architectural, and they hadn't considered risk threats, unfortunately this kid found one. Now this restaurant is facing litigation, it's costly both financially and in their reputation. Their capital and business is at risk, so it makes a safety assessment look pretty inexpensive and proactive, doesn't it?
Ok here is a NYPost article on it. Apparently the family had gone back and forth to the restrooms going behind that booth so at some point in time during the rotation there is sufficient room that an adult can get behind there. The parents say he was a little ahead of them and heading behind the booth but being small he couldn't see that the space was narrowing as the room rotated. If this is the case, then passage behind booths should be blocked or the booth's should be moved enough away from the wall that people can't be stuck behind. There also should be a big master shutoff right on that wall. https://nypost.com/2017/11/20/worst-...ng-restaurant/
As someone pointed out in the thread, the rotation is at snail pace, not like a Disneyland ride-- so the narrowing didn't quickly enclose, the rotation from my understanding and the despiction of it would be so slow so as not to be something that would create a dangerous hazard. I admit if he were my child in my blind grief I might lash out and sue everyone I could, but objectively speaking I really as a very cautious parent myself am having difficulty being convinced the restaurant was culpable in not drawing a conclusion a 4-5 inch space could be a life threatening hazard. How hazardous was it really also since in 41 years of diners frequenting the restaurant nobody was even injured
You're missing the point entirely, have you served in the military? In the military there are constant and endless risks, in combat and not. Yes, they do imagine scenarios of all kinds because the hardware costs millions of dollars and thousands of dollars go into training a specialist to carry out operations. You don't leave all of that expense to chance of something simple that got overlooked.
I imagine since the restaurant has been in business for over 40 years, it has seen several transformations that were not considered in the original design. I can also imagine that the subsequent designs were more cosmetic than architectural, and they hadn't considered risk threats, unfortunately this kid found one. Now this restaurant is facing litigation, it's costly both financially and in their reputation. Their capital and business is at risk, so it makes a safety assessment look pretty inexpensive and proactive, doesn't it?
A glitch in this is imagining. You can't find guilt based on "I can imagine that they may have..."
[quote=mondayafternoons;50194848]As someone pointed out in the thread, the rotation is at snail pace, not like a Disneyland ride-- so the narrowing didn't quickly enclose, the rotation from my understanding and the despiction of it would be so slow so as not to be something that would create a dangerous hazard. I admit if he were my child in my blind grief I might lash out and sue everyone I could, but objectively speaking I really as a very cautious parent myself am having difficulty being convinced the restaurant was culpable in not drawing a conclusion a 4-5 inch space could be a life threatening hazard. How hazardous was it really also since in 41 years of diners frequenting the restaurant nobody was even injured[/QUOTE]
That's the jury's job isn't it? Since there was a fatality the restaurant is under a more demanding level of scrutiny than a "normal" accident that may involve an inconvenience or bodily injury.
As someone pointed out in the thread, the rotation is at snail pace, not like a Disneyland ride-- so the narrowing didn't quickly enclose, the rotation from my understanding and the despiction of it would be so slow so as not to be something that would create a dangerous hazard. I admit if he were my child in my blind grief I might lash out and sue everyone I could, but objectively speaking I really as a very cautious parent myself am having difficulty being convinced the restaurant was culpable in not drawing a conclusion a 4-5 inch space could be a life threatening hazard. How hazardous was it really also since in 41 years of diners frequenting the restaurant nobody was even injured[/QUOTE]
That's the jury's job isn't it? Since there was a fatality the restaurant is under a more demanding level of scrutiny than a "normal" accident that may involve an inconvenience or bodily injury.
That's true, and none of us here on cd are the jurors-- but we are discussing it.
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.
