I'm trying to stay out of this, but there are some key points of Club liability that need to come into focus.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jeremy Billiel
I hate to be "that guy", but you are all MISSING THE POINT!
By saying ISAAC is better and you had crashes that the ISAAC helped, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH
You can not go in front of a court case and use that crap...
Assume that you are in court and you are writting your letter to a judge and jury.
Having been involved in over 100 product liability lawsuits as a defendant (never lost) let's see how this would play out.
Plaintiff's attorney: "Mr. Quadraplegic, severely-scorched, morphine-dieting, drooling race car driver, please explain to the jury how you came to be injured."
Driver: "Well, I researched head and neck restraints almost ten years ago. I chose the Isaac system because it performed well in crash tests -- especially in side impacts -- and, most importantly, let me disconnect and leave it behind, so I wouldn't get stuck in a burning car. Then the SCCA took it away from me. When I crashed using an SFI product I didn't have the lateral support and I fractured my neck. Then the fire started and I got cooked. That's why I'm suing the SCCA -- and everybody else -- for umpteen brazillion dollars."
[Wife and kids sobbing in the first row of the gallery.]
Attorney: "They took it away from you?"
Driver: "Yup, they were afraid they might get sued."
Attorney: "No further questions Your Honor."
The irony here is that SFI affiliation was once considered to reduce liability exposure. But now that it is designing products, every member can become a co-defendant.
You think it's too hard for a sanctioning body to figure out which products are safe? Go to Google, type "head and neck restraint" and click the button which reads "I'm feeling lucky." That's the defense? I'm too stoopid to Google?