Walmart Faults Tracy Morgan for Not Wearing Seat Belt During Car Accident
40 replies, posted
[QUOTE]On Monday, Walmart delivered its answer in a New Jersey federal court to [I]30 Rock[/I] actor[B]Tracy Morgan[/B]'s lawsuit arising from [URL="http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/tracy-morgan-critical-condition-6-710047"]a six-car accident[/URL] on the New Jersey Turnpike. Among nine affirmative defenses, Walmart says that injuries "were caused, in whole or in part, by plaintiffs' failure to properly wear an appropriate available seatbelt restraint device."
Morgan was among several people injured who are now suing Walmart for negligence.
In particular, [URL="http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/tracy-morgan-sues-walmart-deadly-718146"]their lawsuit filed in July[/URL] questions whether Walmart driver [B]Kevin Roper[/B] was fatigued at the time of the crash. According to the suit, Roper had commuted 700 miles from his home in Jonesboro, Ga., to a Walmart facility in Smyrna, Del., before beginning his shift.
"Walmart knew or should have known" that Roper had been "awake for more than 24 consecutive hours" ahead of the crash.
In its filed answer, Walmart wouldn't go into particulars about exactly what happened. The corporate giant says it has been designated by the National Transportation Safety Board as a party in an investigation of the accident. Walmart cites [URL="http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/831.13"]a part of transportation law[/URL] as limiting the dissemination of investigative information.
"Accordingly, absent entry of a Protective Order and adequate protections by the Court to maintain the confidential nature of Wal-Mart's responses as required by the NTSB on-going investigation, Wal-Mart is unable to admit or deny" various allegations in the lawsuit.
[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/walmart-faults-tracy-morgan-not-736398[/url]
Such is the rigors of the 'blame game'.
Who wears a seatbelt in a limo
[QUOTE=Papytendo;46110031]Who wears a seatbelt in a limo[/QUOTE]
nobody because it's a fucking limo and limos don't usually have seatbelts
Seatbelt or not, him not wearing one didn't cause the accident.
I never knew you could get scum for such low prices, thanks Walmart!
Isn't it illegal for a trucker to be driving on the job after being awake for 24+ hours?
I see where Walmart is coming with this one. If his injuries could have been avoided by a seatbelt, then he put himself in that danger. The semi may of precipitated his injuries, but they were preventable if he had followed the law
Wear your seatbelt Tracy Morgan
I'm pretty sure "a driver who's being worked like a slave slamming his semi into them because Walmart is too fucking cheap to have a competent transportation network" is slightly more worrying than the personal safety standards of some celeb enjoying himself in a limosine.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;46110131]I see where Walmart is coming with this one. If his injuries could have been avoided by a seatbelt, then he put himself in that danger. The semi may of precipitated his injuries, but they were preventable if he had followed the law[/QUOTE]
The wearing of a seatbelt does not magically make the semi avoid a six-car pileup.
I see where they are coming from this but if the truck slammed into the limo, I doubt the seatbelt wouldn't done much. But of course it's all speculations, I don't know how it all went down exactly.
seatbelts aren't required by law in limos in NJ if i'm correct. Infact in the tri state area we don't require seatbelts for backseats and limos in general. As well as buses.
Walmart is just passing the buck for a fatigued driver. Guess they want to try and drag the case on and on.
[QUOTE=A B.A. Survivor;46110198]The wearing of a seatbelt does not magically make the semi avoid a six-car pileup.[/QUOTE]
We're talking strict lawyer talk here. Not logic.
Lawyers will see that he precipitated his own injuries, thus not liable for them
[QUOTE=A B.A. Survivor;46110198]The wearing of a seatbelt does not magically make the semi avoid a six-car pileup.[/QUOTE]
It's not the accident they're attacking, it's who's responsible for the injuries sustained to Tracy Morgan. They're trying to find out how they can pay the least amount of money in this whole thing.
"woah woah woah its your fault you got injured when i shot you because you didnt wear your body armor!"
[QUOTE=Ardosos;46110130]Isn't it illegal for a trucker to be driving on the job after being awake for 24+ hours?[/QUOTE]
It goes further than that. Truck Drivers are similar to pilots. They're only allowed so many hours a day, and so many a week, and have mandatory non-driving hours before they can drive again (Pilots are allowed so many a day/month)
It's about 12 a day
Either way, you go back to the very start of the accident and chain of events that lead to the injuries and it was the Driver of the Wal Mart truck, who was absolutely violating the Hours of Regulation federal laws (All truck drivers have to, it's impossible for them not to, but this was on the extreme and a lot more than an hour or two of doctored logbooks)
[QUOTE=Pepsi-cola;46110071]Seatbelt or not, him not wearing one didn't cause the accident.[/QUOTE]
WalMart isn't arguing that caused the crash. I wish everyone here and Reddit would stop using a tabloid source for this. WalMart's argument is that the majority of his injuries could have been avoided had he been wearing a seatbelt. The lawsuit is over his injuries, not the act of the crash itself.
"He wasn't wearing Kevlar when I shot him, it's his fault!"
[QUOTE=Code3Response;46110131]I see where Walmart is coming with this one. If his injuries could have been avoided by a seatbelt, then he put himself in that danger. The semi may of precipitated his injuries, but they were preventable if he had followed the law[/QUOTE]
There's something wrong with you when you believe the person who got crashed into is at fault when clearly there is something wrong with the people who made one of their own employees drive for more than a full day straight.
[QUOTE=Pepsi-cola;46110071]Seatbelt or not, him not wearing one didn't cause the accident.[/QUOTE]
Neither did Walmart. It's the fault of the driver and the fault of the driver alone.
[QUOTE=TAU!;46110338]There's something wrong with you when you believe the person who got crashed into is at fault when clearly there is something wrong with the people who made one of their own employees drive for more than a full day straight.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Code3Response;46110213]We're talking strict lawyer talk here. Not logic.
Lawyers will see that he precipitated his own injuries, thus not liable for them[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=TAU!;46110338]There's something wrong with you when you believe the person who got crashed into is at fault when clearly there is something wrong with the people who made one of their own employees drive for more than a full day straight.[/QUOTE]
It's plain old victim blaming, the guy got hurt because someone crashed into him, not because of the seatbelt. The injury is a direct result of the crash.
[QUOTE=TAU!;46110338]There's something wrong with you when you believe the person who got crashed into is at fault when clearly there is something wrong with the people who made one of their own employees drive for more than a full day straight.[/QUOTE]
Walmart didn't make him drive for more than 24 hours straight, and they probably didn't know that he had already been awake for like 13 hours when he showed up for work. It's the fault of the driver; megacorps like walmart follow federal regulations to the fuckin teet. They do not go over them, do not break them, and do not bend them. If a employee breaks a fed regulation, like for instance lunch breaks, and doesn't take a lunch break before clocking out, they'll straight up fire him.
If Walmart knew he had already surpassed the federal regulation for driving hours, they would have fired him or reprimanded him for it. Furthermore, the driver should have left an an earlier date so he would have had to drive 26 hours in one stretch. He's really got no excuse.
[QUOTE=HawkeyeTy;46110193]I'm pretty sure "a driver who's being worked like a slave slamming his semi into them because Walmart is too fucking cheap to have a competent transportation network" is slightly more worrying than the personal safety standards of some celeb enjoying himself in a limosine.[/QUOTE]
I heard that Walmart actually has a well-paid supply chain. All of their truckers make good money along with good benefits. The only problem is that when you're just minutes late to the dock to unload you can end up being in limbo for over a day waiting to get unloaded. That's time spent being unpaid doing jack shit but wait there until they call you over to unload. I'm not 100% sure about that but my dad has heard many stories like that happening with Walmart because he's a trucker himself.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;46110348]quote[/QUOTE]
Lawyer talk, big whoop, of course they'll see it that way. But even then, they are at fault for overworking an employee, which lead to the accident itself. If you really want to get into lawyer talk, whoever decided a limousine didn't need passenger seatbelts is also to blame.
Welp, I'm dumb
[QUOTE=TAU!;46110377]Lawyer talk, big whoop, of course they'll see it that way. But even then, they are at fault for overworking an employee, which lead to the accident itself. If you really want to get into lawyer talk, whoever decided a limousine didn't need passenger seatbelts is also to blame.[/QUOTE]
They didn't overwork him, I can guarantee you of that. If they knew that he had already been driving for 14 hours before he came into work, they wouldn't have let him start hauling cargo that day. It's the drivers fault for driving for 14 hours before he went to work. He should have left the day before and rested before going to work.
[b]EDIT:[/B]
Furthermore, if theres anything walmart hates, it's paying benefits and overtime. The majority of walmart workers are part time employees so they don't get employer benefits or overtime. So theres no way in hell they'd knowingly let this dood rack up nearly 25 hours of work in 2 days.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;46110397]They didn't overwork him, I can guarantee you of that. If they knew that he had already been driving for 14 hours before he came into work, they wouldn't have let him start hauling cargo that day. It's the drivers fault for driving for 14 hours before he went to work. He should have left the day before and rested before going to work.[/QUOTE]
Well, that's clarified. Even then, it'd be easier for Walmart to just fire the driver instead of blaming Tracy for not wearing a seatbelt. So, why blame Tracy anyway?
[QUOTE=TAU!;46110421]Well, that's clarified. Even then, it'd be easier for Walmart to just fire the driver instead of blaming Tracy for not wearing a seatbelt. So, why blame Tracy anyway?[/QUOTE]
They're blaming Tracy because Tracy is suing walmart for something they're not at fault for. Walmart's mega-team of Corporate lawyers aren't just gonna sit on their hands and throw a walmart employee under the bus, even if he's at fault. It's easier to win a court case if you make the victim look like they're at fault.
Shitty move but hey, it's a shitty move to sue walmart. Sue the Driver if you just want to get money.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;46110397]They didn't overwork him, I can guarantee you of that. If they knew that he had already been driving for 14 hours before he came into work, they wouldn't have let him start hauling cargo that day. It's the drivers fault for driving for 14 hours before he went to work. He should have left the day before and rested before going to work.
[b]EDIT:[/B]
Furthermore, if theres anything walmart hates, it's paying benefits and overtime. The majority of walmart workers are part time employees so they don't get employer benefits or overtime. So theres no way in hell they'd knowingly let this dood rack up nearly 25 hours of work in 2 days.[/QUOTE]
You realize that most trucking companies are so fucking evil that they don't care if they overwork their employees. They sometimes force the truck driver to fudge driving log books so they could keep driving despite going over the 14 hour limit driving.
[url]http://abcnews.go.com/US/danger-forcing-truck-drivers-drive-sleep-deprived-exposed/story?id=25544862[/url]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.