Click to go to Forum Home Click to go to maXbimmer Home

Go Back   maXbimmer Forums > Misc > Off-topic
User Name
Password


Welcome to Maxbimmer.com!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 05-28-2010, 09:36 AM   #1
hockeyfan27
5th Gear Member
 
hockeyfan27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Durham Region
Posts: 958
Suing the city for your own stupidity...



The Ontario Superior Court of Justice has found that the City of Toronto was not negligent in its operation of a public archery range, at which one friend catastrophically injured another in a bizarre plan to retrieve arrows.
The two friends went on a picnic during the fall of 2000 and ended up playing a casual game of archery at an open, public archery operated by the City of Toronto.
After having trouble locating arrows they had shot that had missed their targets, the two concocted a plan whereby one of them would shoot an arrow over the top of the target while another stood down range to see where the arrow would land. In this way, they would find their lost arrows.
In conducting this experiment, Patryk Stankiewicz accidentally shot an arrow that hit Wieslaw Galka, who was standing downward of the target, in the eye and lodged in his brain. Galka sued Stankiewicz and the City of Toronto for $3 million after suffering partial deafness, blindness, reduced mobility and profound psychiatric needs.
The archery range had one entrance, near which a sign was posted. Among other things, the sign said:
"1. All persons to be clear of range before shooting can commence."
"3. Arrows must be aimed and released at Target (butts) only."
The plaintiff, who acknowledged he was mostly at fault, basically argued the city was negligent because even though it had posted these rules, it was aware of the fact that people broke these rules all the time. Since the city did nothing to stop the rules from being broken, it must have reasonably foreseen that a stray arrow would hit someone.
Ontario Superior Court Justice Deena Baltman said the argument had "superficial appeal," but nevertheless did not "bear up under closer scrutiny."
Baltman noted in her judgment that the lawyer for the city "admitted seeing archers shooting while players at adjacent butts (targets) were on the field, [but] she never witnessed - or heard of - archers shooting while another archer was down range of the very same butt. The reason for that is likely because the danger is so obvious that no right thinking person would attempt it."
Baltman thus concluded: "The incident in question was so unpredictable that the City could not have been expected to foresee or prevent it."

__________________

1998 328ic - Sold
hockeyfan27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2010, 10:06 AM   #2
daytona
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,715
this reminds me of the rednecks who had his buddy wear a bullet proof vest and shot him point blank to see if the vest works....
__________________
.Never banned but came very close..three times
daytona is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2010, 11:20 AM   #3
davericher20
black and blue
 
davericher20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: 2 storey 3 bedroom 1 car garage
Posts: 3,608
Quote:
Originally Posted by daytona View Post
this reminds me of the rednecks who had his buddy wear a bullet proof vest and shot him point blank to see if the vest works....
wtf!!!!!!??????? link?

yep, or how bout the guy who sued (mcdonalds?) because the toilet seat landed on his dick and crushed it. Then his wife sued because he couldn't pleasure her anymore. And they won.
__________________


Quote:
Originally Posted by JINT View Post
Some people have serious track experience from the cruise, so what is fast to you, isn't fast to them.
davericher20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2010, 11:52 AM   #4
daytona
6th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,715
Quote:
Originally Posted by davericher20 View Post
wtf!!!!!!??????? link?

yep, or how bout the guy who sued (mcdonalds?) because the toilet seat landed on his dick and crushed it. Then his wife sued because he couldn't pleasure her anymore. And they won.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUXUC...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2z1L...eature=related

it maybe fake but the news cast did a review of the medical reports and he was shot.
__________________
.Never banned but came very close..three times
daytona is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2010, 12:00 PM   #5
slemmer
Driving in the fast lane
 
slemmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Missed in 'sauga
Posts: 3,002
Good for the City. They did their due diligence. If someone wants to go around the posted rules that's their own risk and responsiblity. If the posted signs near the Humber by the QEW says do not swim and you swim and catch a disease are you going to sue the City because the City knew someone may drink the water? What a waste of good tax payers money. Hope the Plaintiffs got stuck with the legal bill.
__________________

'04 645cic
'05 GMC Sierra SLT Z71 CCSB 4x4
'00 740i Sport
slemmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2010, 02:41 PM   #6
Romaz
5th Gear Member
 
Romaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Thornhill
Posts: 1,023
lmfao
__________________
Romaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2010, 02:57 PM   #7
e36_freak
Mostly absent
 
e36_freak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: mississauga canada
Posts: 2,125
Send a message via ICQ to e36_freak Send a message via MSN to e36_freak
whatever happened to personal responsibility? I find it funny that we live in a society that people no longer take responsibilities for their own action like if you drink at a bar or club and you decide to drive and get in an accident it should be your own fault for doing so and not the bar's fault for serving you alcohol. It was not like the bar/club put a gun to your head saying drink up or die... You chose to drink you chose to drive you should suffer the consequences for doing so...!

or in this case, if you decide to be an idiot and stand there knowing your buddy is going to shoot an arrow in that direction and you get hit by said arrow its your own damn fault
__________________
Life isn't about how many breaths you take, but the moments that takes your breath away.
Giving the government money and power is like giving a teenager whiskey and an M5.

[M]i[K]E[][M]i[K]E[]
e36_freak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2010, 03:31 PM   #8
hockeyfan27
5th Gear Member
 
hockeyfan27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Durham Region
Posts: 958
the number of lawsuits I could post that are pure "nobody protected me, from me" would make you vomit.

Hell, it's friday...... 3 examples:

A thief breaks into a house, get himself locked in the garage for 2 weeks while the homeowners are on vacation, successfully sues the homeowner & garage door opener manufacturer for mental anguish, pain and suffering.

You must have read about the RV driver who put the cruise control on and went to take a nap in the back....won the lawsuit and now the RV manufacturer has to recall units and post "this is not automatic pilot" warnings on their machines.

Thief tries to enter a home by putting a ladder (left in the backyard by the homeowner) up to a 2nd floor window. Teen-aged son wakes up to see a guy coming in his window, jumps out of bed and pushes him out. guy falls, breaks his back...successfully sues for diminished quality of life..... "the ladder shouldn't have been there, unlocked, for me to use"

Each stupid lawsuit won sets a precedent, so stupid begets more stupid......
__________________

1998 328ic - Sold
hockeyfan27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2010, 09:37 PM   #9
slemmer
Driving in the fast lane
 
slemmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Missed in 'sauga
Posts: 3,002
Please tell me it happened in the States where class action law suits are the norm.
__________________

'04 645cic
'05 GMC Sierra SLT Z71 CCSB 4x4
'00 740i Sport
slemmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2010, 01:16 AM   #10
hockeyfan27
5th Gear Member
 
hockeyfan27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Durham Region
Posts: 958
One of those was from my insurance licence course 10 yrs ago... (ladder & window) I can't remember if it was Canada or US. RV is definately state-side, I think garage door was Canada.
__________________

1998 328ic - Sold
hockeyfan27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2010, 01:14 PM   #11
911LOL
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Gone West
Posts: 20
hahahaha
911LOL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2010, 06:11 PM   #12
Mad Cow
2nd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 184
I'm disappointed with you guys, 11 posts and no dumb Polak jokes?
Mad Cow is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Maxbimmer Copyright 2001 - 2015