[seasick]

That, in no way, makes him a Californian. An idiot, perhaps, but not neccessarily a Californian.

when in Rome...

 

[Bikinfoolferlife]

Calling him an "mtb'er" is too good for this

jerk/maroon/wimp/lawyerlover/poor-excuse-for-a-human-being/pos. Makes me mad and sad. While I'd love to harass this moron it's not likely going to do anything positive. Maybe he should sue the bike manufacturer because it failed to transport him through the hazard. Maybe he should sue his parents for raising an incompetent human being. Maybe he should remove himself from society for being a useless slug. Thanks for letting me rant...this kind of lack of personal responsibility and abuse of our legal system drives me nuts.

 

[Cary]

Focking ridiculous.

If they have sued it's a matter of public record. We just need to find the right venue to get copies of the complaint.

Superior court in Santa Rosa sounds plausible.

Any locals want to fork over a few bucks and some time to get copies of the complaint?

I volunteer to publicaaly (internet at least) humiliate the losers in an attempt to knock some sense into them.

I'll create a whole friggin' website to showcase their idiocy.

Holy crap, I agree with Pete about something.

 

[Trevor!]

jerk/maroon/wimp/lawyerlover/poor-excuse-for-a-human-being/pos.

Forgive me, but in your attempt to let out a bit of steam, don't defame lawyers. They are not bad, and merely providing their services, even if in some remote way it effects you.

 

[Pete]

Yes I agree it would be wise to leave things be for a while. Producing a web page may lead to some sort of imputation which, knowing plaints like these would lead to an action in defamation.

It's not defamatioon if it's the truth.

I'm willing to take that risk. Plus, I'm sure my lawyers could beat up their ambulance-chasing lawyers with both hands tied behind their backs.

I guess I need to schedule a mid-week Annadel session that includes a stop at the court house.

These people are in the same league as the idiots that sued McDonalds becasue they spilled hot coffe in their lap.

 

[Trevor!]

It's not defamatioon if it's the truth.

I'm willing to take that risk. Plus, I'm sure my lawyers could beat up their ambulance-chasing lawyers with both hands tied behind their backs.

I guess I need to schedule a mid-week Annadel session that includes a stop at the court house.

These people are in the same league as the idiots that sued McDonalds becasue they spilled hot coffe in their lap.

Looks like you have your work cut out for you.

I couldn't agree more about the fool bringing this case. I am studying The Law of Tort for the whole academic year, and it never ceases to amaze me how creative some people are in bringing wild and preposterous actions when the blame is in their utter stupidity.

Unless the law is greatly different in America, defamation does not discriminate against falsity or truth. As you may very well agree, its the truth most people want to hide, and many cases of defamation are brought because the truth comes to light for all to enjoy.

 

[Trail Punk]

I'm a lawyer. They suck.

Forgive me, but in your attempt to let out a bit of steam, don't defame lawyers. They are not bad, and merely providing their services, even if in some remote way it effects you.

Just trust me on this one. In California, for every one that resembles a well-adjusted human being, there's 500 that should be hanged.

 

[Bikinfoolferlife]

Apologies to the decent lawyers out there...

but I have met few of those over the course of 30 years in business...I live in California. I heard a disgusting statistic years ago in that in San Francisco alone there are more lawyers than all of Japan. I believe it.

 

[BigDigger]

Just trust me on this one. In California, for every one that resembles a well-adjusted human being, there's 500 that should be hanged.

What sort of law do you practice? I'll agree that there are plenty of hacks out there, but your 500 to 1 ratio is way over the top. I realize that those hacks are an embarrassment to what I truly believe is a noble profession, but use some judgment--you don't need to smear the profession further by offering that sort of gross exaggeration as fact. I’m bothered by it when I hear it from laypeople, but I understand it from them—they are operating on less than complete information. You, on the other hand, should know better.

If you’re really that disgusted by your colleagues, you should find a new line of work.

You know full well how many opportunities the state will have to get this suit kicked prior to trial if it has no merit. Further, as you should know juries are in reality very hard on plaintiffs who were the cause of their own injury, and will come back with a defense verdict 99.9% of the time in those cases. Even if the jury gets it wrong, there are post-trial remedies. Also, if the plaintiff loses, he gets to pay the defendant’s costs, so it’s not as though there’s no downside, and anyone who’s ever been in litigation with the state knows they do not do nuisance value settlements.

The reality is that there are far fewer “frivolous lawsuits” in the personal injury world than people believe. Indeed, the vast majority of frivolous suits are actually businesses suing businesses—but that doesn’t make for good copy on the 5:00 news, so we don’t hear too much about it.

Anyhow, if you’re going to respond to posts in a public forum as an authority on the subject of attorneys by virtue of your being one, perhaps you should be more responsible about what you say.

 

[Trail Punk]

What's wrong with "smearing" a profession?

What sort of law do you practice? I'll agree that there are plenty of hacks out there, but your 500 to 1 ratio is way over the top. I realize that those hacks are an embarrassment to what I truly believe is a noble profession, but use some judgment--you don't need to smear the profession further by offering that sort of gross exaggeration as fact. I’m bothered by it when I hear it from laypeople, but I understand it from them—they are operating on less than complete information. You, on the other hand, should know better.

If you’re really that disgusted by your colleagues, you should find a new line of work.

You know full well how many opportunities the state will have to get this suit kicked prior to trial if it has no merit. Further, as you should know juries are in reality very hard on plaintiffs who were the cause of their own injury, and will come back with a defense verdict 99.9% of the time in those cases. Even if the jury gets it wrong, there are post-trial remedies. Also, if the plaintiff loses, he gets to pay the defendant’s costs, so it’s not as though there’s no downside, and anyone who’s ever been in litigation with the state knows they do not do nuisance value settlements.

The reality is that there are far fewer “frivolous lawsuits” in the personal injury world than people believe. Indeed, the vast majority of frivolous suits are actually businesses suing businesses—but that doesn’t make for good copy on the 5:00 news, so we don’t hear too much about it.

Anyhow, if you’re going to respond to posts in a public forum as an authority on the subject of attorneys by virtue of your being one, perhaps you should be more responsible about what you say.

It's not like talking trash about someone's grandmother. That would be truly lame. I didn't criticize any individual.

Besides, that line about a "noble" profession is an insult to every layperson who works. All work is noble. My wife isn't a lawyer, but I don't hear smug lawyers saying that "human resources manager" is a noble calling. Or shop mechanic, or FedEx driver, etc.

Lawyering doesn't deserve any special esteem from the public, and the innumerable jerks out there with bar licenses draw criticism to the profession. Even from within the profession. I'm tired of dealing with losers who routinely lie and abuse others. Just this week, my wife came home from work with stories about an obnoxious and ineffecive lawyer who was rude to her from the first minute of their interaction.

Feel free to express disagreement with me. But can the crap about how I should know better. If you're concerned with the public's perception of the profession, go put on weekend seminars about how to act like a human-being. Good luck trying to insulate lawyering from public criticism.

 

[scorcher seb]

I saw someone crash on the same trail on the one occasion that I rode in Annadel before the SSWCs at Downieville. It is possible that he crashed as a result of the fear that someone might have placed a pile of gravel in the trail, that may or may not have been avoided.

Either way, I've suffered since then from the mental trauma of seeing him crash and suffer a mild gravel rash. Can anyone advise me on the chances of me adding my name to the complaint and make it some sort of class action suit?

 

[Skygrounder]

Time for an English lesson:

When we look up the adjective "noble", the first line of the definition presents the following:

Noble No"ble, a. Compar. Nobler; superl. Noblest.

You'll note that they provide three forms of this word: regular (noble), comparative (nobler), and superlative (noblest). Attaching this adjective (or any adjective) to a noun in its regular form is used to indicate that the noun has this quality. The comparative form is to indicate one subject has more of the quality than another, and the superlative form is used to indicate that the subject has an unmatched level of the quality.

In this case, the word used was noble. Not nobler or noblest. If BigDigger had stated that "the profession of law is nobler than your wife's profession," then I can understand how you might be hurt. But that simply didn't happen.

There's more than one noble profession, and there's plenty that are not noble as well (think hitman). Saying that 500 out of 501 lawyers should be hanged is a very clear indication that you believe the profession of law to be ignoble. I don't understand how you've taken disagreement with your point to being a personal attack on your wife's profession.

It's not like talking trash about someone's grandmother. That would be truly lame. I didn't criticize any individual.

Besides, that line about a "noble" profession is an insult to every layperson who works. All work is noble. My wife isn't a lawyer, but I don't hear smug lawyers saying that "human resources manager" is a noble calling. Or shop mechanic, or FedEx driver, etc.

Lawyering doesn't deserve any special esteem from the public, and the innumerable jerks out there with bar licenses draw criticism to the profession. Even from within the profession. I'm tired of dealing with losers who routinely lie and abuse others. Just this week, my wife came home from work with stories about an obnoxious and ineffecive lawyer who was rude to her from the first minute of their interaction.

Feel free to express disagreement with me. But can the crap about how I should know better. If you're concerned with the public's perception of the profession, go put on weekend seminars about how to act like a human-being. Good luck trying to insulate lawyering from public criticism.

 

[bluronthetrails]

there are few things

There are a few things that may surpass the threshold of stupidity set by the the most stupid idiots this nation has got. THat guy suing the park just surpassed it, BIG TIME.

Seriously, why doesn't he also sue the builder of his home because he banged his head on the floor when he fell on it, punch drunk...

 

[ScaryJerry]

that just pisses me off! man, i've crashed in those big gravel beds more than my fair share of times, that's for sure. i usually plow into those big sections on my own accord just because i like the way it feels when my big 2.7 inch tires start to wander around in the loose stuff at low pressure. to believe that someone is actually filing a suit against the park is perposterous. people should have the sense to realize that mountain biking is an inherently dangerous sport and accept the reprecussions of their decision to go out and ride. you don't see me suing the Piner skatepark when I eat it on their concrete. you don't see me suing Santa Rosa when I fall off a ledge down in Courthouse square. As mild mannered as I am, this is one instance where'd I'd like to find the jackass behind this lawsuit and 'derail' him if you know what I mean. he must have a seriously loose headset to think he can get away with a lawsuit and not suffer some sort of reprecussion from the hundreds of mtb'ers like myself who call this great city home and are lucky enough to have Anadel in their backyards.

I have to say that I agree that the anti-mountain bike activists will be all over this one. I can almost smell the trail closures already.

That was one of my favorite trails. Last summer, I rode/suffered up to Lake Ilsanjo every morning just to take advantage of the two minute downhill return trip along Spring Creek. If anyone closes that trail down, I'll be an outlaw after all the trespassing I'll have to do....

 

[Drewdane]

(think hitman).

Why must you denigrate this honorable trade?

 

[Trail Punk]

OK...no more lawyer bashing.

Why must you denigrate this honorable trade?

But when the park is closed because the state can't afford to litigate this crap anymore (even though it keeps winning thanks to the great work by the state defense lawyers), you'll have a lawyer to thank. When these suits are filed, no one asks, "What's best for everybody?" It's all about putting some cash in the pocket of the plaintiff and the plaintiff's lawyer. Adding insult to injury, your taxes are paying for the court system where this will happen.

Start building some backyard dirtjumps, because that may be all that's left one day. Trade the all-mountain bike for a 20 inch Haro BMXer.

 

[Drewdane]

But when the park is closed because the state can't afford to litigate this crap anymore (even though it keeps winning thanks to the great work by the state defense lawyers), you'll have a lawyer to thank. When these suits are filed, no one asks, "What's best for everybody?" It's all about putting some cash in the pocket of the plaintiff and the plaintiff's lawyer. Adding insult to injury, your taxes are paying for the court system where this will happen.

Start building some backyard dirtjumps, because that may be all that's left one day. Trade the all-mountain bike for a 20 inch Haro BMXer.

I was talking about hit men.

 

[pimpbot]

I think....

I got a call from a lawyer representing the State of California because a mountain biker is suing Annadel State Park. Apparantly he was riding down Spring Creek trail about a year ago when they were preparing to do trail maintainance. At the end of the trail where it merges with Canyon trail, was a pile of gravel. His contention is that he couldn't see the gravel, or didn't know he could ride around it, and went over it, crashed, and got hurt.
I told the lawyer (she got my number because my wife crashed on the same gravel pile and was seen by a ranger who got our phone number) that the gravel pile was easily avoided, and anyone who went over it did so by their own choice. Furthermore, the earlier parts of the trail are way more treacherous than the flat ending of spring creek trail.

A year ago, my wife followed me as I (voluntarily) jumped over the gravel pile. She miscalculated, crashed, and ended up breaking a bone in her hand. But she freely admits she chose to do something that was probably beyond her skill level.

Our state parks have enough financial problems without having to pay everyone who gets hurt on a trail. I'll probably be called as a witness. I told the lawyer if she needs anyone else I'd post on MTBR and she'd probably get more help

I think she said the prosecution has Robert Van Der Plas, author of The Mountain Bike Handbook, as a witness.

... I'll wait to hear the whole story before I pass judgement. Right off the bat, I think the judge will throw this out on the 'implied dangers of the sport' kinda stuff.

 

[633]

I was talking about hit men.

Hmmm. If you had to choose - hang out with lawyers or hang out with hit men? I guess I'd pick the lawyers, but I'd have to think hard about it.

 

[Joe Steel]

Isn't there something called 'Assumed Risk'?

Where dipshi# who purposely brought his/her bike to the trail must have some knowledge that there is risk involved?

I can't believe they're wasting time with this.

Although I couldn't believe they award stupid people who burn themselves with coffee either.

Go figure