Bizzarre circumstances and story

Post Reply New Topic

I had watched a court tv show today before doing some work from home. They happened to have a very interesting case on too. The plaintiff had taken the defendant to court due to having supposed health problems after offering to help the defendant in a life threatening situation.

Scenario

1. The defendant gets into accident and car starts on fire and is trapped
2. The plaintiff sees the accident and rescues the defendant and even takes them to the hospital
3. All seems well until the plaintiff and the rescuer starts contacting the defendant by wanting to the take them to court due to the fire causing the plaintiff health problems from inhaling the smoke when rescuing the defendant. This is so they can pay for their medical bills by attempting to sue.
4. The defendant hires a private investigator and finds out that the plaintiff is a chained smoker and has been using two packs per day and has issues with his lungs as a result.
5. The plaintiff denies that he smokes two packs but only one per day
Note: The case got denied

I want to know what you as adults think of this type of behavior from the Plaintiff. I find it very strange.

I think too many people are sue-happy.

Nobody forced the plaintiff to rescue the defendant. It was a brave and good thing to do. But then I assume he got greedy? He was maybe having breathing problems which may have been caused by smoke at the scene, but if he was having difficulty, it was probably started by his smoking habit before he rescued the defendant.

Maybe he had someone talking him into suing? He figured he could get free money from the defendant's insurance company.

It's interesting.

I've heard the opposite problem, where a victim sues the rescuer, claiming the rescue process led to further injury or jeopardy.

Also, I don't know if there are any good Samaritan laws that come into play.

As for the plaintiff, he took it upon himself to rescue the victim. Admirable, but done at his own risk. Since the accident didn't affect him directly, and he made the conscious decision to get involved, he entered at his own risk.

I agree with the case not being heard.

Wow I would have not have thought of those. In my mind, I am screaming "Sociopath," and "Con artist." However I did not want to mention it in my first posting because I wanted to get some answers from others as well with a better solution.

I mean, who goes and rescues someone from a wreck and then turns around and decides they are going to manipulate them so they can get what they need or want by suing? That is very strange.

I really felt like he made an art out of his actions.

Well at the time, he probably was sincere in his rescue efforts.

Later, when he began having breathing difficulties and large medical bills, someone, probably a lawyer said, "you know, you saved that person's life. He's alive because of you. Don't you think you deserve something. We can say the smoke inhalation added to the problem." Even if he would have had those problems regardless.

Ah..now that is something that I did not even think of. A lawyer can put all kinds of nasty boulderdash in our heads to make a buck.

I have dealt with a lawyer who said some of the same things.