good lawsuit or a greedy asshole?

[conehead433]

Originally posted by: Kaervak

The lawsuit contends that boat owner John M. Lyons Jr. suffered his own distress, in the form of "grief, mental anguish, embarrassment and suffering . . . due to the removal of the boat," as well as its replacement costs.

Go die in a fire, asshole.

AMEN

 

[RKS]

If property is destroyed for public neccessity no compensation is required. I don't think the lawsuit will be successful but the boat insurer should pay for the replacement.

 

[Zorba]

He should sue the insurance company for not covering the full value of the boat.

 

[Kelemvor]

Since he didn't bother to return the boat to where it belongs, I'd say he's liable to pay the blue book value for it. I'm sure he'd have people donatin up the butt to help him though. As for the rest of it, it's all BS so I hope the whole thing gets thrown out.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: FrankyJunior
Since he didn't bother to return the boat to where it belongs, I'd say he's liable to pay the blue book value for it. I'm sure he'd have people donatin up the butt to help him though. As for the rest of it, it's all BS so I hope the whole thing gets thrown out.

why should he get blue book? the guy already got a check from insurance. granted the guy claims its does not even cover half of it.

 

[sandmanwake]

You try having to give an alligator a blowjob to take to you dry land after someone stole your boat and left you on top of a roof, surrounded by water and see if you don't cry about grief, mental anguish, embarrassment and suffering . . . due to the removal of the boat.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Well, he should get compensated for the boat, but not much else.

right. he should be compensated for a used boat that just went through a hurricane. soo how much do you think that is worth?

Going through a hurricane isn't going to hurt the boat. What, is it going to get rained on real hard? God forbid a boat get wet. It was still moored to it's not like it was beached and battered.

 

[91TTZ]

It does not matter if it's an emergency or not, the boat belonged to another person. They could have left the area when they were warned, but they stuck around like idiots. Now they're stuck there and they start looting other people's stuff.

 

[herkulease]

the story doesn't tell us everything.

Was the owners trapped themselves? I would certain buy his grief, mental anguish and suffering claim is the owners were trapped and had to find another way out. Since their boat was gone. Dunno about embrassment though.

 

[savvy]

Wow. I don't know what to say.

 

[jagec]

I can see both of their perspectives.

Really, Morice NEVER should have admitted to taking the boat. Just do the deed and disappear, as an anonymous hero. That way you can't get sued

 

[newParadigm]

this is so stupid, like the guy who won the lawsuit that fell of the guys house that he was robbing.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: newParadigm
this is so stupid, like the guy who won the lawsuit that fell of the guys house that he was robbing.

Only this time, the guy who is suing is the one whose stuff was stolen. Insurance won't give you enough to buy another one like it, so when that guy stole his boat, the owner was left was only a fraction of the value that he once had.

If I steal your Corvette and your insurance company only wants to give you enough for a Camaro, what are you left to do?

 

[DrPizza]

Originally posted by: herkulease
the story doesn't tell us everything.

Was the owners trapped themselves? I would certain buy his grief, mental anguish and suffering claim is the owners were trapped and had to find another way out. Since their boat was gone. Dunno about embrassment though.

Explain how you would get to your boat IF you were trapped. "Oh no! I'm trapped in my house. I think I'll swim over to the marina, get my boat, drive the boat back to my house, and rescue myself."

edit: and about embarrassment: Maybe not before this law suit, but from now on, people are going to point their finger at him and say, "hey, aren't you that jerk who is sued someone because he saved 90 lives, but used your boat?"

 

[herkulease]

Originally posted by: DrPizza

Originally posted by: herkulease
the story doesn't tell us everything.

Was the owners trapped themselves? I would certain buy his grief, mental anguish and suffering claim is the owners were trapped and had to find another way out. Since their boat was gone. Dunno about embrassment though.

Explain how you would get to your boat IF you were trapped. "Oh no! I'm trapped in my house. I think I'll swim over to the marina, get my boat, drive the boat back to my house, and rescue myself."

edit: and about embarrassment: Maybe not before this law suit, but from now on, people are going to point their finger at him and say, "hey, aren't you that jerk who is sued someone because he saved 90 lives, but used your boat?"

From reading the story it looked the owner had boat at his house. I assume its like how some people park their boat on a trailer in their drive way. if the water is high enough and in some places it was then it shouldn't be that hard to push it off and use it.

I may not own a boat but I'm sure it wasn't at the marina. Unless the owners lived right next to it. Plus the lawyer who took the boat returned there and explained that he took the boat. See quotes below.

But all the boats his friends suggested either sank or already had been put to use, Morice said. On State Street Drive, however, he noticed two boats that appeared usable and used bolt cutters to cut gate locks and check them out. Morice said he took Lyons' because the keys were in the ignition. He said he didn't know who owned it.

Sometime in September or October, Morice returned to the home on State Street Drive and spoke to Lyons' wife, he said, explaining why he had taken their boat.

here's a satellite photo of state street drive in broadmoor, la. Its not even close to any bodies of water. Unless you count pools.
pic

 

[bleeb]

The guy never got his boat back.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: newParadigm
this is so stupid, like the guy who won the lawsuit that fell of the guys house that he was robbing.

Only this time, the guy who is suing is the one whose stuff was stolen. Insurance won't give you enough to buy another one like it, so when that guy stole his boat, the owner was left was only a fraction of the value that he once had.

If I steal your Corvette and your insurance company only wants to give you enough for a Camaro, what are you left to do?

This is a special case; it doesn't quite fall under the definition of theft. If the cops commandeer your corvette to chase a criminal and the insurance company only gives you enough for a camaro, the cops will tell you to go fvck yourself, it was done for the greater good. True, this guy was just a regular citizen, but it's still not the same as simply "stealing" the boat.

The real question is, would the guy's boat have been wrecked in the hurricane anyway, if it had not been commandeered?

Or did the previous owner just look at the insurance check and think, "I'm going to need a bigger boat"?

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: jagec

The real question is, would the guy's boat have been wrecked in the hurricane anyway, if it had not been commandeered?

That's very doubtful, since the vast majority of damage during hurricanes is due to water/flooding. Flooding doesn't usually hurt boats

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Zorba
He should sue the insurance company for not covering the full value of the boat.

Finally, someone points the finger at the bastage corrupt Insurance scam Industry. :thumbsup:

 

[Zenmervolt]

Two things stand out here:

1. The boat was obviously in seaworthy shape when it was taken, so there was obviously not enough damage from the storm to have ruined the boat.
   The person who took the boat never returned it.

It doesn't matter if you take something and never give it back, it's stealing. The rescuer did a great thing to help people, but by not returning the boat he is absolutely, 100% liable for any and all costs to the boat's rightful owner, including the cost of replacing the boat. The rescuer is also criminally liable for theft of the boat.

ZV

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: jagec
This is a special case; it doesn't quite fall under the definition of theft. If the cops commandeer your corvette to chase a criminal and the insurance company only gives you enough for a camaro, the cops will tell you to go fvck yourself, it was done for the greater good. True, this guy was just a regular citizen, but it's still not the same as simply "stealing" the boat.

Regular citizens are not police officers. They are not allowed to commandier anyone else's property. Even Police are not allowed to commandier vehicles unless there is an immediate threat. As much as I hate to say it, this was not a case of an immediate threat.

ZV

 

[newmachineoverlord]

Bah, the boat had probably committed acrime anyways. Burden of proof is on the owner to provide evidence that the boat was innocent.

 

[Runes911]

Um yeah greedy! So many people lost way more in Katrina than a boat. A lot of people lost loved ones, animals, homes, and everything they owned. There were way more important things lost than that. This guy should pay the man who saved those people in that boat for giving him grief. I saw so many people take advantage of this whole situation and to those people I have no sympathy. I really feel bad for all of the true victims who have to put up with them.

 

[HomeBrewerDude]

Originally posted by: Balt
No good deed goes unpunished. Especially in New Orleans.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Runes911
Um yeah greedy! So many people lost way more in Katrina than a boat. A lot of people lost loved ones, animals, homes, and everything they owned. There were way more important things lost than that. This guy should pay the man who saved those people in that boat for giving him grief. I saw so many people take advantage of this whole situation and to those people I have no sympathy. I really feel bad for all of the true victims who have to put up with them.

Yup, if my father dies, I can steal your car because my loss is "worse" than yours? Your "logic" is absurd.

The only reason the boat was lost is because the defendant stole it. Had the defendant not acted to steal the vessel, it would have remained on the plaintiff's property and been recoverable. The defendant is sole-ly responsible for the loss of the boat.

ZV