kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted December 12, 2003 The last paragraph of this story makes me sick. Suing the equipment makers, too? Stringer's wife lost all sympathy for me with that move... Story MINNEAPOLIS (AP) -- The survivors of Korey Stringer owe the Minnesota Vikings and other defendants in the family's lawsuit more than $47,000, a judge has ruled. Hennepin County District Judge Gary Larson ruled that plaintiffs Kelci Stringer, who is Stringer's widow, his estate, and his parents, James Stringer and Cathy Reed-Stringer, are responsible for $47,588.03 that the defendants spent on expert witnesses, depositions, medical records, court fees and other lawsuit-related expenses. The judge filed the order this week. In April, Larson threw out most of the lawsuit's claims and dismissed the allegations of negligence against the Vikings and their employees. Korey Stringer, a 27-year-old Pro Bowl offensive tackle, collapsed after practicing in high heat and humidity July 31, 2001, at the Vikings' training camp in Mankato. He died of heat stroke the next day. His survivors then sued the Vikings; team officials, and some doctors and clinics. Vikings attorney Jim O'Neal said Thursday that the tram (tram?)had indicated it would waive the costs if the plaintiffs would waive their appeal. But the plaintiffs refused, and appealed Larson's April ruling to the state Court of Appeals. "It's time for this to be over," O'Neal said. He said the cost to the Vikings of defending against the lawsuit was more than the $47,000 covered by the order, but not all costs, such as attorney fees, are recoverable. In July, Kelci Stringer filed a lawsuit in federal court in Ohio against the NFL and the maker of Korey Stringer's helmet and shoulder pads. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Slayer 0 Report post Posted December 12, 2003 As the boards only apparent outspoken Vikings fan, who remembers very clearly that hot and muggy day when Korey Stringer collapsed and later died, all I have to say is... <ahem> Fuck that bitch Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ripper 0 Report post Posted December 12, 2003 The only way I would be like "fuck her" is if the family didn't recieve a suitable amount of money after his death. I mean, he DID die while on their clock. If she got millions on that then fuck her, otherwise, she should try to get some money. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted December 12, 2003 I would understand if the Vikings would have turned a total blind eye to this, but to go out and sue everything connected with Stringer and the Vikings (Surprised she didn't sue McDonalds for making him a big boy) when Korey hasn't even gotten settled in his coffin is where I draw the line. Fuck her -- will that be cash or check Kelci?... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Slayer 0 Report post Posted December 12, 2003 On top of that, nowhere does there seem to be any possible minute little hint that perhaps Stringer had a hand in his own death Pointing fingers > assuming responsibility Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted December 12, 2003 Perhaps the Vikings should sue Kelci for cooking all that food for him... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dr. Tom 0 Report post Posted December 12, 2003 It's refreshing to see people who go lawsit-crazy when someone dies have to pay court costs for the other party. I really wish we'd adopt the English rule over here, so that happened all the time, but until then, I'll just enjoy it on the occasions it does. Oh, and bitches be trippin'... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Slayer 0 Report post Posted December 12, 2003 I really wish we'd adopt the English rule over here Clarify, please Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dr. Tom 0 Report post Posted December 12, 2003 The English court system has a rule that, if you bring a lawsuit against a person or corporation and you lose, you're required to pay the legal fees for BOTH parties. (There might be more to it than that -- British posters please add/clarify -- but that's the meat of it.) What it does is cut down on the number of frivolous lawsuits, since you might suddenly have to drop some serious quid on someone else's legal fees. If we had that rule over here (not to get too political, but the Republicans did bring it up for a vote after winning Congress in 1994, but it didn't pass), I think a lot of silly lawsuits would be eliminated. You lost your suit against McDonald's for making you a fat jackass? Pay their $300,000 in legal fees. I'm not saying Stringer's widow shouldn't have sued for anything, but she clearly went overboard, and with a rule like that in place, she probably wouldn't have. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EVIL~! alkeiper 0 Report post Posted December 12, 2003 Well, its a good idea Tom, but I don't think it would work in practice. I mean, what happens when someone has a legitimate lawsuit against a big corporation? You can't compete with their lawyers, and you're fucked if you lose. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted December 12, 2003 Well, its a good idea Tom, but I don't think it would work in practice. I mean, what happens when someone has a legitimate lawsuit against a big corporation? You can't compete with their lawyers, and you're fucked if you lose. That's my only concern with this law, too. There has to be some other catches that we don't know about. I think it would be fair, if after the trial, the plaintiff goes to some panel or judge to determine if the lawsuit brought against them if frivolous. A great example of this, in my opinion, is the equipment-maker Stringer is suing. Make her pay once this case gets thrown out of court... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sfaJack 0 Report post Posted December 12, 2003 I would think such a rule would apply only to "frivolous" lawsuits (i.e. Kelci Stinger suing the helmet manufacturer) and not to losing what are legitimate claims. For instance, if you slipped and fell and broke your hip because Joe Dipshit working at McDonald's didn't put up a wet floor sign, but you (somehow) lost in court, I would think you wouldn't be on the hook for court costs. Obviously there's a claim there...you just didn't win in court. But if you sue McDonald's because "they made you fat," your ass better be ready to pay up. It'd all be subject to a judge's discretion, of course, but I'd guess that's how it would work. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Czech Republic 0 Report post Posted December 13, 2003 The English court system has a rule that, if you bring a lawsuit against a person or corporation and you lose, you're required to pay the legal fees for BOTH parties. (There might be more to it than that -- British posters please add/clarify -- but that's the meat of it.) What it does is cut down on the number of frivolous lawsuits, since you might suddenly have to drop some serious quid on someone else's legal fees. I'm not British, but I believe that the case has to be ruled frivolous for the plaintiff to pay for both parties. If they just lose a legitimate lawsuit they don't have to pay the defendant's fees. And I agree with that system, as I stated it. It works great that way. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EVIL~! alkeiper 0 Report post Posted December 13, 2003 Well in our system, doesn't a judge have to decide if a case has merit before allowing it to go to trial in the first place? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
2GOLD 0 Report post Posted December 13, 2003 While I disagree with these lawsuits she filed, I think this is the perfect chance for the Vikings to come out smelling like roses. Don't make her pay you the court fees, just wave it and let it rest where it is. Hell, they can say they did it in memory of Korey and be done with it. The only company that needs to be sued are those jokers who made that supplement which has been in the system of most of these deceased sports players lately. I can't spell it but it was in the system of that Orioles pitcher. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted December 13, 2003 The only company that needs to be sued are those jokers who made that supplement which has been in the system of most of these deceased sports players lately. I can't spell it but it was in the system of that Orioles pitcher. Ephedra?... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dr. Tom 0 Report post Posted December 14, 2003 I'm not British, but I believe that the case has to be ruled frivolous for the plaintiff to pay for both parties. It does, and for some reason, I managed to leave that out of the explanation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
