Nephew Sues Aunt - Struck By Loose Horse

[Spot]

Sonesta, thats EXACTLY what I asked a page or so back!

Something sounds / smells fishy with this one!

:Spot:

[Glimmerglass]

Stupid question, but under attorney/client privilege are you allowed to discuss this case? Just wondering.

[velveteyes]

Thank you!!!!

As I kept reading through the replys I kept wondering if I'm the only one who would think its VERY < VERY ODD for a laywer that is compiling a case, to discuss it on a public internet forum, and signing it by name no less.

I have 2 friends who are laywers, and the one thing they always say to everyone involved in a lawsuit, is to not discuss the details with anyone.

SURELY that goes for the Lawyer.

As a matter of fact, if said "nephew" would know about this thread or anyone that is part of said lawsuit, this lawyer would immediately excused and it would hurt this "aunts" defense immensely.

I don't think any lawyer would be so unproffessional as to discuss their case on a public forum...thats just ridiculous!!

I smell horse poop.

but thats just in my humble opinion only...

[Sonesta]

Wait, unless there is a court gag order, it is perfectly permissible to discuss the facts of a case with ANYONE you want and MOST lawyers do so to help prepare for the case. What is NOT allowed is for a lawyer to discuss with third parties private conversations held between the lawyer and the client. The facts that will be in dispute are fair game and Julie is doing the RIGHT thing by her client in trying to get feedback to assist her in preparing a defense.

Julie is a well respected attorney and you can be sure that she would not do anything unethical.

[JSwan]

Sure - lawyers do this all the time. Ever watch the news? Attorneys are always discussing the case - and we even know the name of the client and the details. Civil suits as well as criminal cases.

She's not divulging privileged information. The facts she stated and the statements made by the parties were already taken in a deposition.

This attorney doesn't appear to be revealing any information that cannot be read in the file room at the courthouse.

It's an interesting case - and one we should be watching. The equine liability statutes need to be upheld in court - if they are not - we're all in big time trouble. We won't be able to get insurance, boarding stables could close, events would be cancelled, etc.

And it's VERY bad if expert horsemen having accidents do not trigger the statute.

Additionally, this attorney is a nationally known respected professional. Trust me, she isn't a kook.

[Character]

Something doesnt sound right here. Are the aunt and uncle in any kind of financial difficulties? I find it very strange that the uncle would pull an "I told you so" during a court case. (shank over nose)

I admit that I havent read the entire thread...it's just that things dont add up. If he was in the barn without the aunt being aware of it...then how would she be negligent, and who would she warn? The barn cats?

And if he couldnt hear the galloping of hooves due to the banging of the stallion...then how in heck would he have heard a yell? I can hear hoofbeats from a LONG way...but cannot hear people yelling. Hoofbeat sounds go through the ground also...yelling is just through the air. The wind can grab a voice, but the ground just keeps sending it on.

It's just weird. Also...ever yell something like "watch out" and have people turn to you and say "whaaaaaaat?" PLEASE. Probably the reason why lawn jarts were banned. Same with golf "heads up" seems to mean just that. Everyone stops and says "whaaaaaat?" then looks up and kerplunk the ball just misses them.

The whole thing sounds odd to me. I would really question the uncle, and if you havent already, respond to the papers with a really scathing attack, rather than a defending of the issues.

There was no negligence...unless the aunt and uncle try to prove their was, and then you have to question their motives.

[Law and Horse Sense]

Just following up on some of the questions.

No attorney-client privileges are breached here because everything I'm sharing with you is public record in the courthouse.

To keep this case from being dismissed outright (after I'd tried to convince the court to do this), the nephew's lawyer filed a brief saying there were issues that a jury needed to resolve as to whether the aunt exercised proper control over the filly.

Let me share the nephew's side of the story on this. Here's what his brief argued:

* The nephew's own opinion was the horse "had a screw loose." (no detail - that's it)

* Plaintiff (the nephew) thought the horse was not broke to lead when he saw it at an auction some time before the incident -- he does not know when this was -- and he claims _he_, the plaintiff, saw the filly "fighting" some unspecified handler on the lead. (But he has not come forth with the name of the handler and no evidence has been presented that the aunt or uncle ever saw or experience the filly "fighting" anyone on the lead before the incident.)

* The nephew says the aunt should have listened to her husband when he said the filly ought to be led with a chain for "a little more control" at some unspecified time before the incident.

* The nephew claims the jury should decide whether the sunt used the proper degree of control over the filly.

The judge agreed with the nephew. He wrote an opinion stating, in part, that because the aunt knew the nephew kept a horse in their barn and might go out there, "injury to someone in the vicinity could therefore be expected in this case." His opinion also noted that "a factual question exists as to what degree of control Defendant was required to exert over the horse, as well as whether defendant (the aunt) acted reasonably."


Thanks again, everyone. I am enjoying reading your insights and comments.

-- Julie Fershtman

[Merry]

My trainer is an "expert witness" in several horse/liability cases a year. She has a Master's Degree in animal behavior (equine?) and so she's been involved in similar types of cases, always for the defense.

It is truly amazing-- and rather sad, I think-- that relatives will sue relatives and best friends will sue best friends over what we horse folks see as just everyday Shit Happens sort of stuff.

So, my opinion?

Right away, when I heard he was collecting disability due to shoulder injuries, but was a roper, I smelled a rat. Er, a deadbeat rat. The cynic in me thinks he's suffered recurrent shoulder injuries from roping and wants a meal ticket.

As a cowboy of some ilk, he knows full well the risks involved anytime he is on horse property.

Can you dig up anyone who's ever seen HIM have trouble handling an unruly horse? How about anytime he's been seen (at a team penning, roping event or rodeo) where he's had to struggle with a rambunctious horse? To me, that would point out that he is aware that horses are unpredictable at times, especially when frightened and particularly when young.

Case dismissed.

Oh. And he needs to be gelded immediately.

[IronwoodFarm]

Sorry to hear that the motion for summary judgment didn't fly with the judge. It is always worrisome with a jury trial and Michigan juries are known for their generosity.

Like Sonesta, I have to wonder if this isn't a friendly lawsuit, although you have not indicated so. With over 20 years dealing with liability claims, this one doesn't quite smell right to me. However, if it is going to trial, just assume you'll have the world's horse ignorant jury and they will be biased toward plaintiff.

I'd like to make a general comment to those posting on this thread. I agree that this is a dumb lawsuit, but in America we all have the right to sue each other. I'm not saying this is a great system, but it is the one we have. If nothing else, this thread should tell you why you need to purchase liability insurance for your horse and/or horse operations. I do work in the industry and I see lots of litigation in my work, so I am paranoid. But really, truly, you want insurance to provide you a lawyer like L&HS to protect you in the event of a claim. I can guarantee you that the hours and expense L&HS has billed to this claim has already surpassed all the premium the insured ever paid for the insurance. I don't like paying my insurance premiums either, but when I see a thread like this, I don't mind as much. And I hope if I ever need help, either L&HS or Sonesta are on my carrier's retained counsel list. I'm impressed ladies!

[ESG]

I've had the privilege to see Sonesta's work in person - you're right to be impressed.

[Sandbarhorse]

Well, it may be too late, since you're probably already in court this am, but the fact that this man has experience with horses should play a big part in this. If you end up going to a jury trial, I'd be very sure to emphasize that this man was not in the same position as the members of the jury in terms of knowledge of horses and their behaviors.

Anyone with experience with horses knows that you need to ALWAYS be cognizant of your surroundings in a barn or risk getting hurt. Didn't he wonder where his Aunt was? Clearly she wasn't in the barn and wasn't in the house which, to me, means she was doing something either with a horse or in the pastures/paddocks. Third party handling a horse requires extra safety dilligance.

In turn, to an experienced horse person, it's really irrelevant whether the horse was properly restrained. The issue is whether "a" horse could have become loose at any given time, due to fence failure, gate left open, Aunt leading a horse or a horse jumping a fence and running into the barn (which they tend to do, particularly near feeding time).

Anyone who's been around horses long enough has either: 1) had one get loose; or 2) has had a loose horse run past them. More than likely both! Complete bull for anyone to say otherwise. I'd be dragging every person from every barn in the state, if necessary, to court to say this, just to discredit him.

Good luck, this sounds like a bunch of hooey and it also sounds like he saw an oppurtunity when his uncle said something about the chain. I'd also be curious whether his uncle is in on this whole disaster of a lawsuit, which frankly, sounds pretty damn frivolous to me.

[MAD]

If the nephew is right-handed but has an injury to his right shoulder, he would of course grab the lead shank with his left hand. It wouldn't matter if he is right-handed or left-handed. His right-shoulder was previously [permanently ] injured; only his left arm would have been available to grab the shank if we are going with that conspiracy theory.

[silver]

Well I've had both a collapsed lung AND a rotator cuff injury and the circumstances under which you are likely to suffer those two injuries are pretty different. Collapsed lung = blunt trauma. Rotator cuff= rotational motion.

As the guy was a boarder I think you should be able to find lots of old cases where a boarder has sued the barn owner over a similar occurance to support your arguement. I know it happened at a barn where I boarded, pony got loose from Kid A and steamrollered kid B to get back to it's pasture. Kid B broke shoulder and parents sued but they lost.

[N&B&T]

This is a long thread, so I won't repeat the many valid points other people have made. However, FWIW, here are a couple of ideas I haven't seen:

With regard to the filly getting loose--I have been told by a veterinarian that, pound for pound, horses' muscles are 6 times stronger than humans, and that's without the difference in the AMOUNT of muscle they have. If they want to do something, they are going to do it, shank or no shank (and I agree with those that have said a chain could well be a detriment to control in this case, as well as a danger to the filly if she got loose).

With regard to the nephew's attitude (as indicated by his remarks)--I wonder if that doesn't reflect a sort of cowboy vs. racehorse-type expectation of horse behavior and human control.

I'm not sure how to express this, but most of the horses I've seen in a western context (not tons, to be sure ) are biddable and unflappable to a surprising degree - polo ponies too, BTW - and I am largely around extremely well-behaved horses. Similarly, the people who work with western horses seem to be shocked and disapproving of small glitches in behavior that sporthorse types take for granted. And I imagine that racehorses, especially babies, are even more unpredicatable than mature mature sporthorses This possibly explains the discrepancy between the nephew's experience and his stated opinions.

I dunno if either point is valid or helpful. The whole thing sounds weird to me!

Editted to add: BTW, I have gotten a rotator cuff injury from a fall, at least I think that's how it happened.

[jacksmom]

and i wonder while i have NEVER made a claim (knock on wood) my insurance premiums keep soaring. be sure you emphasize that for the jury.

i'm a lifetime horse enthusiast. i've been knocked over and kicked by other folks animals and it would NEVER occur to me to to sue them. horses are large dangerous animals and even if you are a safty freak (i am), if you spend enough time around them you will eventually get injured. negligence isn't a factor. there's a reason we have the word 'accident' in our vocabulary...

this guy is looking for a payday. when you get him on the stand, just start giving him rope. he will hang himself.

is there any way the insurance company can recoup your fees? i'm sure that it would be trying to get blood from a turnip. somebody needs to send this turnip, and others like him, a serious message.

good luck - keep us posted.

[Inyureye]

The nephew's a roper? Boy, wouldn't it be great to get a video of his shoulder in action. Wouldn't it be really great to get a video of him and his shoulder during an 8 sec bronc ride.

[SandyUHC]

Well, there is no doubt what must be done -- a re-enactment. Take the jury to the "scene" and get two big, fast high school athletic guys to put on a pantomine horse suit and run the guy down again. It may hold up jury deliberations because they will be laughing so hard, but I believe it will be worth it.

[MandyVA]

One thing to keep in mind is you don't want the jury buying into this notion that the filly was behaviorally defective. They need to see that all horses can get loose no matter how well trained or properly handled, and this filly is a normal horse. If they think she purposely bowled the nephew over, they will think she is a dangerous animal and therefore the aunt had a higher duty to control her than normal. Non-horse people who only know about horses through movies sometimes think horses are like cars and just react to the controls you exercise over them. They need to realize horses have brains and think for themselves and choose whether or not to comply with your wishes.

Assuming she really did run into him and knock him down, I would get your expert to also testify that when a horse runs into a barn, it is very difficult for them to see at first (going from bright to dark) and in all likelihood she couldn't see him. He then is the idiot for standing in the dark aisle when he should have known that he would be all but invisible to any horse that might enter the barn. Even if she was being quietly led in by the aunt, he could spook her badly by lurking there in the aisle. I am assuming the barn was, like most, not incredibly well lit. I have seen horses balk at coming into our barn, pausing for a few moments to let their eyes adjust.

Clearly he assumed the risk of getting hurt in the barn, whether he could have known the filly would get loose or not. When there are horses around there is always the possibility of danger, no matter how unforeseen it may be.

[goobs]

I am wondering why you are asking our opinion because you will clearly be dealing with people who are NOT horsepeople - so our opinions will mean basically nothing to your case. We all know what the ins and outs and dangers, etc. of being around horses are but there are a lot of people who don't know and can't understand unless they are "horsepeople".

I can't believe that guy is suing his aunt though.

[Tiki]

This is in NO way a defense of the nephew, but you CAN incur a rotator cuff injury by blunt force trauma. It is named rotator cuff because the cuff of muscle, etc. rotates thearm and shoulder, not because of the type of injury. You can injure ANY body part by blunt force trauma, and most by rotational injuries. Nevertheless, I definitely smell a rat!!!