Dallas Cop's Family Sues Hillary Clinton

[npk]

Source: myfoxdallas.com

DALLAS - The family of a Dallas police officer who died in a crash two years ago while escorting then-presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton in a motorcade has sued her, the city of Dallas and the maker of the helmet he was wearing.

Sr. Cpl. Victor Lozada-Tirado's widow and children filed the lawsuit in state district court Monday, saying the city did not give him proper training for escorting a motorcade. It also accuses Clinton and her campaign of not giving timely notice for motorcade assistance and claims the helmet was defective.

The family is seeking damages including loss of economic support.

Read: Complete Lawsuit (PDF )

Lozada-Tirado, 49, died Feb. 22, 2008, when he was thrown from his motorcycle after clipping a curb and crashing into a guard rail. The final police report on the accident said he crashed because he couldn't negotiate a curb.

The report noted that his failure to drive in a single lane was a factor in him being thrown from his motorcycle on a viaduct near downtown. He was in the rear of the motorcade.

A spokesman for the U.S. State Department, where Clinton now serves as secretary of state, referred calls on the lawsuit to Lyn Utrecht, the lawyer for Clinton's presidential campaign. Utrecht did not immediately return a call from the Associated Press on Tuesday. Helmet manufacturer Super Seer Corp., in Evergreen, Colo., also did not immediately return a call. A spokesman for the city of Dallas said the city would not comment Tuesday.

The lawsuit said that during the accident, the clasp holding the chin strap on his helmet disengaged and his helmet came off.

It said the 20-year Dallas police veteran had only graduated from motorcycle training shortly before being assigned to the motorcade.

"He was not properly trained for an assignment as dangerous as a motorcade; nor was he experienced enough," the lawsuit said, adding that less than a month before Lozada-Tirado's death, it was recommended he have more training.

The lawsuit said the city did not perform advance planning, run through and meetings about the motorcade assignment prior to the event. The lawsuit said that was in part because Clinton and her campaign, which is also a defendant, did not make a timely request for motorcade assistance.

Read more: http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpp/news/dallas-cop%27s-family-sues-hillary-clinton

[Robb]

1. What, no lawsuit against Harley Davidson?

The attorney must be slipping. :eyes:

[Arctic Dave]

2. Shouldn't they sue the cement company too. n/t

[WriteDown]

3. That's the typical lawsuit strategy: SUE EVERYBODY...

and see what sticks.

[Dappleganger]

7. And also to see who has the best insurance coverage.

At least that what happens around here.

[WriteDown]

9. Yep....

They'll either settle or get someone to pay up big.

[depakid]

15. Not "strategy" on the part of evil lawyers- but rather protection against malpractice

If you can state a claim against a person or entity- and decline to do so, you'd better document a very good reason and have informed (and preferably consent from) the client.

[WriteDown]

17. TomAto, TomatO. nt

[Demit]

25. how's the o in your first tomato pronounced?

:)

[No Elephants]

34. BullShit, bullshiT.

[WriteDown]

37. So eloquent as usual. nt

[paulsby]

21. doesn't work that way in england

and works just fine. there, a plaintiff can be saddled with the defendant's fees if they lose (commonly known as loser pays) which disincentivizes this sort of chicanery

[depakid]

22. That's a Republican wet dream- glad to see Democrats embrace it

Think it's hard to hold corporation accountable and get redress for injuries now- just imagine what it would be like if they could not only paper you to death in every case, but make you pay for it, too.

Yep, that's the ticket!

[paulsby]

23. so, by your 'logic', corporations aren't held accountable in england

vs. here?

fascinating

[depakid]

24. Just looking at the reality of the situation

There's a good reason why Republicans love proposals to "stick it to the lawyers" like these.

Here's a hint: corporations already have huge advantages in any civil case- doing this would virtually insure that American courts were left open only to those with big money to risk, with everyone else left without a practical remedy.

[WriteDown]

28. So England is a corporate paradise? Who knew. nt

[No Elephants]

35. Pls. see Reply ##s 30 and 32. Fascinating, indeed.

[No Elephants]

33. I hope that you aren't assuming everyone who posts here often is actually a Democrat?

[paulsby]

43. god knows that's true

heck, half the posters here would call the average democrat a closet repub , freeper etc.

i'm well to the left of barack obama and *i* get accused of that

[No Elephants]

32. Please see Reply # 30., See also, for example,

http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/Rule11.htm

(Each of the 50 states has its own counterpart of federal Rule 11, whether by state court rule or by state statute.)

[WriteDown]

38. See post 19 for an example. nt

[Feron]

19. Yep.

That happened to a family friend. She was sued even though she was a victim in an accident caused by a drunk driver.

[WriteDown]

29. Did she win? nt

[No Elephants]

30. No. It would probably be malpractice NOT to sue everyone who had a role in an event, BUT

the court can impose fines on both the lawyer and the client for suing people against whom the suit is frivolous. And getting your client subjected to fines is probably also malpractice (but the latter is just my logic--don't know that part for sure).

So, it's like being between Scylla and Charybdis, or being between a rock and a hard place.


But, from this and other posts of yours, it seems you've completely bought into RW anti-lawyer propaganda, so I apologize for trying to introduce reality. Lord knows, reality has no place in RW propaganda.

On edit. Please also see Reply #32.

[paulsby]

44. a typical contentless post

declare something you disagree with a "RW argument" thus eliminating any need to actually justify your position

[RaRa]

31. my dad

was initially included in a malpractice case where his role was reading the brain scan and determining the patient was dead. Of course he wasn't included in the following lawsuit, but the fact that he was part of the "intent to sue" portion meant he had to notify his insurance company and that costs money and so it goes....

[No Elephants]

36. Please see Reply ##s 30 and 32. How would the lawyer have known the exact scope of

your Dad's involvement before being able to get the records?

As far as his insurance rates going up for no good reason, wouldn't that be a beef against the insurance company, not the lawyer or the plaintiff?

[WriteDown]

39. So lawyers just sue everyone in vicinity before they know their involvement?

Interesting.

[RaRa]

41. yes to cover their bases and prevent missing someone

before the statute of limitations is up (

[RaRa]

40. my comment was not an attack on the lawyer

simply a comment on how things are done and how they contribute to the expense of things. Get a grip.

[Blue_Tires]

5. she may as well sue her in-laws too, for spawning the victim

maybe she can go back and sue the person who first introduced her to her future husband, and the church for marrying them...

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

46. Why the disdane she's just trying to take care of her family?

[TheCowsCameHome]

4. Sure. Sue everybody in sight.

Its the American way.

[Dappleganger]

6. As a biker I've watched FHP train numerous times on a local course...

and also have taken an advanced riding class by a retired FHP trainer. These guys get hours and hours of training before being allowed to go out on duty, at least they do in our little part of FL. The courses they run them through are extremely narrow, they have very high standards of riding requiring little to no errors. To watch them run through the advanced courses is nerve-wracking to me as their skill-level is just baffling.

From my observation it seems like this police escort had no business being sent out due to his lack of experience. That, coupled with a helmet defect seem like the main contributors to his accident. That's my opinion based on riding experience, being around FHP's on the course and paying VERY close attention to how MC accidents occur locally. Helmet failure doesn't usually happen around here, it's LACK of a helmet which is the main contributor.

My heart goes out to his family who will never be able to replace a husband and father. :(

[Robb]

10. I also feel for the family, of course

...But as a rider I also know who is responsible as soon as I start a bike. He wasn't hit, he clipped a corner.

From a professional standpoint perhaps the department should require more hours of training, but as a professional the officer shouldn't have swung a leg over the bike unless he was ready for wherever he was headed that day.

[Dappleganger]

12. Exactly.

Not only that, but his lack of experience endangered the lives of anyone in his vicinity including his fellow officers.

[uncle ray]

42. you don't suppose,

the incompetent rider is also incompetent at securing his helmet?

[Renew Deal]

8. He's a cop. Since when do cops wait for notice to do anything?

Do they request notice from criminals before they respond? Do they request notice from drivers before the speed? It's a stretch.

[npk]

11. Yeah I don't get that part

If he wasn't properly trained he shouldn't have been out there, period. But that isn't Hillary Clinton's fault. And it's not like an extra day or two would have prevented the accident. It wasn't a lack of planning, the department made the blunder by putting him out there.

[Dappleganger]

13. Since he'd been on the force for 20 years...

there was probably a degree of over-confidence as well. At 49 he was quite a bit older than any of the officers I met locally who'd all been on 2-wheeled duty for quite some time. Again, just an observation.

[Downwinder]

14. Sometimes it helps if you watch where you are going. n/t

[countmyvote4real]

18. If you don't have a Toyota part installed, that's the least you can do.

Great advice.

[Demit]

26. That was my first thought, he was looking at something/somebody instead of straight ahead.

[Ian David]

16. Bush's motorcades killed two cops, in two separate instances, IIRC.

Plus the two people Bush personally injured with his bicycle.

[SoapBox]

20. "He was not properly trained..."??????

"He was not properly trained for an assignment as dangerous as a motorcade; nor was he experienced enough," the lawsuit said, adding that less than a month before Lozada-Tirado's death, it was recommended he have more training."

HUH? He had taken the training...and finished the training?

And yet the family claims he was inept?

I strongly doubt that somebody just hollered out to him..."hey, motorcade...join in."

[marshall]

27. Interesting in juxtaposition to the Rachel Corrie lawsuit in Israel

Fascinating parallels and also just as remarkable differences.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

45. She's just trying to take care of herself and her family.