The true shame here is that it took lawyers, courts, years, and untold dollars for someone to tell the idiot it was his own fault and to man up and take responsibility for himself.

Karma is a bitch sometimes.

The guy is an idiot - what I want to know is who was his lawyer, and how can we get him tarred, feathered and run out of town.

Last Spring I stepped out of a shuttle van and tore the meniscus in my right knee. I had been having some problems with the knee and knew that I should see doctor but procrastinated until this happened.

After the surgery I was pressured over and over again by Blue Cross to sue the shuttle van company. They knew that if I sued that their liability would be reduced. I refused. The shuttle van company was not responsible for my preexisting condition. Eventually I prevailed.

How many lawsuits are done because the insurance company calls up and basically demands that the insured sue someone under the threat of denial of overage?

I'm not suggesting that such is the case here. But the point is that sometimes you have to take responsibility rather than shift on to someone else. The insurance company wanted me to shift the responsibility so they didn't have to pay. I was responsible for my knee, but I was also insured against that possibility. I took responsibility by making sure I was covered. I did not try to shift the blame on someone else.

Doctors can tell if you require medical treatment, but only a lawyer can determine if you've been INJURED.

I DO hope the guy's ambulance chasing lawyer hit him up for a huge fee!!!!

You're right jim m, its not just a single or two player game.

Blindness is one of your bigger fears? How long did you believe that myth about going blind from.....

And here I thought the only thing that could make golf interesting would be to stock the water hazards with alligators and insist that players retrieve their own balls.

Justice was not served, a greater injustice was prevented.

Justice would be for the golf course and/or its insurer to be made whole since they were in no way at fault. They are not whole as they have lost the money required to pay their attorneys.

I would like to see a modified loser pays rule for civil suits. A hearing is held in front of a different judge than the one who will run the trial. The purpose is for the judge to declare whether or not the suit is frivolous. If it is so deemed and the plaintiff proceeds to trial any way, then the plaintiff is liable for the defendants legal fees should the defendant prevail at trial. If the lawyer is taking the declared frivolous case on contingency, then the plaintiffs lawyer is also liable for defendants legal fees.

The pre-trial hearing should keep the legal system open to truly wronged plaintiffs who might be scared off by the possibility of being destroyed by an adverse decision in a straight up loser pays system. In cases like this one, it would make it much more likely the innocent plaintiff is made whole, or even better, no lawyer will touch the case.

Two bits says this Sanchez guy is a Boomer.

But..but..but....the Obamassiah would be outraged! Where is the SOCIAL JUSTICE? The one's with DEEP POCKETS should pay!

BTW, has Barry sued the guy who caused him 12 stitches?

At least he isn't being punished with a baby.

"BTW, has Barry sued the guy who caused him 12 stitches?"

Hmmm... let me check.

No, he's on the schedule for being hit by a bus on the 12th of December...

You know, symmetry? 12-12? No notice on whether he's supposed to survive it, though...