Sueing the good guy after getting shot by mistake...

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Well, one thing to consider is your medical expenses - because if you get shot, you are going to have some.

1. Should you bear the cost of all those medical expenses yourself? After all, it is unlikely that the bad guy is going to be able to pay them.

2. If you answered "But that is why I have health insurance", then understand that your insurance company is DEFINITELY going to sue the guy if they can and they'll expect you to cooperate with them. Not cooperating with them can result in you paying those costs yourself.

As Clint Smith says: "Every shot you fire downrange has a lawyer attached to it."

And that pretty much sums it up...

 

[Frank Ettin]

..I think part of the problem is that your use of the word "sue" is a little vague. Are you talking about a multi-million dollar civil suit, intended to extract every penny you can from the shooter? Or would simply trying to recover medical expenses, lost wages, etcetera also count as "suing" in your book?...

"Suing" is "suing." For any sort of injury and any particular theory of liability, there are rules that describe the kind of damages recoverable.

One could ask for millions, but unless he can show legally recognized damages totaling millions he won't get them.

If you claim, and you can show, that you were injured through the negligence of another, you would be entitled only to the recognized damages you will be able to prove. The recognized damages are first your economic damages: past and estimated future medical expenses for care necessary to treat the injury; past lost wages (from being off work because of the injury); estimated future lost wages (if your injury leaves you with a reduced future earning capacity); costs associated with retraining you for a different type of work, if your injury leaves you unable to continue to pursue your past trade or profession; and costs you will incur to help overcome the effects of any lingering disability (e. g., making your home or car "handicapped accessible"),

In addition, on a negligence claim, you can recover what are called "general damages." These are damages to compensate for non-economic loss necessarily resulting from the injury. They are basically to compensate you for your pain and suffering, and the amount will be whatever the jury thinks your pain and suffering was worth. Juries can be fairly hard nosed about general damages. It used to be a rule of thumb that general damages would be around three times the "medical specials", i. e., the proven medical expenses.

 

[ScottRiqui]

Well then, if attempting to recover legitimate medical and rehabilitation expenses counts as "suing" for the purposes of this thread, then the poll should be at 100% in favor of suing, unless the shooter and/or his insurance company offer to pay those expenses right off the bat without any pressure.

 

[Frank Ettin]

Well then, if attempting to recover legitimate medical and rehabilitation expenses counts as "suing" for the purposes of this thread, then the poll should be at 100% in favor of suing, unless the shooter and/or his insurance company offer to pay those expenses right off the bat without any pressure.

Yes, for the most part suing is about trying to recover claimed legitimate losses. And if a monetary settlement is offered promptly, and if it's reasonable compensation, the settlement gets accepted; and it all ends there. Asking for compensation is always the first step. It winds up in court only when there's a dispute about liability and/or the amount of damages.

Now consider this. The innocent person you hit with your bullet is a young professional just starting his career and with a young wife and two small kids. Your bullet makes him a paraplegic. Total economic damages, including past and future medical and rehabilitation expenses and lost income could easily, legitimately run $5 Million, or a whole lot more.

Your homeowners' insurance will cover you for liability up to $1 Million. So your insurance company is prepared to pay its $1 Million policy limits. The only problem for you is, however, that will leave you personally responsible for at least another $4 Million.

I just throw that out there to point out that there are numerous, potential complications.

 

[usaign]

"so you are saying that if some moron pops off all 19rds towards a guy with a knife, and hits you in the spine, thats cool? no worries?"

Honestly, I would be angry...my family and friends would be angry. The right thing to do is not being a vigilante and going after the guy who did it though. We are a society with laws and processes. They are in place to keep the peace. Lynch mob justice is not real justice and only encourages violence. Thats just my opinion.

Im certain the prosecutor would find a way to deal with the guy who pops off 19 rounds and certainly there would be litigation against him. Thats the acceptable way to deal with the matter.

 

[jgcoastie]

A few counter-points

I think one of the companies that advertises in the NRA magazines offers insurance against lawsuits resulting from the lawful use of a firearm. Can't remember the name, though.

Interesting. If you remember the name let me know please, I'm curious what the premium would be.

so you are saying that if some moron pops off all 19rds towards a guy with a knife, and hits you in the spine, thats cool? no worries?

That's not what I said. It will heavily depend on the exact circumstances. No situation is identical and there is no way to cover all the possible scenarios here. If I am somehow disabled as a result, then I *may* try to recoup lost wages. Again, depends on the circumstances. If the guy truly saved my life, then I probably won't punish him for it.

Well, one thing to consider is your medical expenses - because if you get shot, you are going to have some.

No, I wont. I am covered 100%. I am insured by TriCare & the U.S. Government, I don't really have to worry about healthcare, at least for the foreseeable future.

I understand that many forum members do not have the level of coverage that is provided to me; in that case, you'd have to do what's best for you.

 

[usaign]

The insurance companies are going to do what they are going to do. However, I am not talking about the insurance companies. I mean where you go out to purposely hire an attorney for the specific purpose of filing a lawsuit in the courts. I dont mean filing a claim with the state or an insurance company. I dont mean the insurance company filing suit on your behalf.

Of course, someone is going to pay for your medical costs and then there will be an attempt to collect. However, I mean where you make a decision to file your own personal suit in a court.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...Im certain the prosecutor would find a way to deal with the guy who pops off 19 rounds and certainly there would be litigation against him. Thats the acceptable way to deal with the matter.

But that still leaves you holding the bag, and footing the economic and emotional bill, for your life changing injuries.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...Of course, someone is going to pay for your medical costs and then there will be an attempt to collect. However, I mean where you make a decision to file your own personal suit in a court.

Who?

[1] If you have medical insurance, that will pay for at least a portion of your immediate medical care, but you might have co-payments or deductibles that you will have to pay out of your own pocket. And if you can't keep working and/or continue to carry your medical insurance, there may not be any insurance around to pay for future care.

[2] If your employer has a good sick leave policy, you might continue to get your pay while you're off work. What happens when your sick leave runs out? What if you can't continue working at your regular job after you recover?

[3] Who's going to pay for any job retraining if you can't continue your regular line of work? Who's going to pay to make your home/car handicapped accessible?

[4] There are only a handful of folks around to pay your medical and other expenses:

1. You -- first and foremost, your expenses are your responsibility.
2. Your medical insurance -- to the extent it provides coverage and less your co-payments and deductibles;
3. Your employer -- through any sick leave or other benefits, that is if there are any or until what there is runs out;
4. Your family -- out of generosity, to the extent money is available;
5. Us, the taxpayers -- to the extent benefits are available under various government programs like Medicaid or welfare; or
6. The guy whose negligence turned your life upside down.

 

[usaign]

"But that still leaves you holding the bag, and footing the economic and emotional bill, for your life changing injuries."

Life isnt fair my friend. Sometimes you are left holding the bag on certain things, but you just have to suck it up. I have been left holding the bag on many things in life, but there is nothing I can do further about it. There will be many times in life where you are left holding the bag. You may want to go against the system, but if you do, it will just lead to trouble. The only advice I can offer is to simply suck it up and drive on which was a common phrase in the Army.

There is a system in place and its best to follow the system. If you feel that justice hasnt been served by the system then you just have to suck it up and drive on. Life isnt fair in every situation. Tragedy and accidents will happen its just a matter of when.

 

[sakeneko]

I can't imagine any general situation in which I *would* sue, without first considering the circumstances. That applies to a car accident, being shot, having my house burned down, etc. The right thing to do is always situation dependent.

If I were shot by somebody who had made a mistake without malice and without reckless disregard, I'd probably expect him to pay for the medical bills and perhaps reimburse my company for time I was off recuperating, but wouldn't want or ask for other compensatory damages. If he refused, or if his insurance company refused to do so without a lawsuit being filed, I'd probably sue. Otherwise, I see no reason to enrich a bunch of lawyers. (I might also decide not to ask for reimbursement of expenses if he or she was poor and it would cause undue hardship, but that would be on the same grounds that I might help out any neighbor who needed help.)

If I were shot by somebody who was guilty of malice or reckless disregard, and I was not absolutely sure that the criminal process would prevent them from doing it again to somebody else, I'd likely sue for a huge sum, and use that as leverage to demand a settlement that agreed to the perp giving up guns, not living in any location where guns were kept, or whatever else seemed necessary to protect people. I'd also include measures to aid enforcement of the agreement if the perp broke it. <ggrrr!>

 

[ScottRiqui]

Originally Posted by usaign
...Im certain the prosecutor would find a way to deal with the guy who pops off 19 rounds and certainly there would be litigation against him. Thats the acceptable way to deal with the matter.

Well, the prosecutor will handle the criminal side of things if any charges are warranted, but are you seriously claiming you wouldn't at least try to recover your medical and rehabilitation costs from the shooter, by lawsuit if necessary? If so, that's not "sucking it up and driving on". Forum rules don't allow me to say what I really think it is.

 

[troy_mclure]

due to my job i would be out of work minimum till the skin is completely healed.

joint damage can, and lung damage will, completely disqualify me from my job.

which would cancel the limited health and disability insurance i have.

if its due to negligence of the shooter(wildly firing, excessive over penetration, etc...) ill definately sue, unless he covers the costs.

if his shot that hits me also saved my life, or i was just unfortunate enough to be in the exact and only position to take the round, i probably would not.

 

[usaign]

Quite honestly, a lawsuit would take years to get through and you may not ever recover anything through that medium. No attorney works for free and they will charge you for all of their work...probably require a retainer. A trial attorney requires at least 700-1000 an hour for being in a courtroom which is why most of these things are settled up front. Then there is the process of collection on a settlement which is a whole other battle. Then there are the mental and emotional toll of the litigation process.

I would not expect to get any money out of anyone in regards to a lawsuit unless the person is part of a larger agency/company or has homeowner's insurance.

Most of the claims from 9/11 were settled by the 9/11 fund and that is because litigation would have been costly and untimely. Those who did file lawsuits did not have a trial until many years after. Some are still in the court system...some of the people who filed lawsuits as a result of 9/11 passed on before the suits even got to court.

 

[Tennessee Gentleman]

No, I wont. I am covered 100%. I am insured by TriCare & the U.S. Government, I don't really have to worry about healthcare, at least for the foreseeable future.

I too am covered by Tricare (retired) and you should know that they will DEFINITELY sue someone who negligently injures you. I know this from personal experience.

Life isnt fair my friend. Sometimes you are left holding the bag on certain things, but you just have to suck it up.

Which is exactly what I would tell the shooter who injured me as I sued him/her.

Look, if you are going to shoot another even in justifiable self defense and you injure an innocent third party then you are financially responsible for their injuries. That is our system and our way. If you cannot deal with that reality then you should not carry a gun.

Massad Ayoob published a story about a guy who was robbed (I think a photography shop?) and was shot then followed the guy outside and shot him while he was carjacking a lady and accidentally shot the lady. She sued and I have no problem with it. The guy was lucky to have gotten off since the thief was running away from him but I think he killed the guy.

If somebody (good guy or not) shot my wife or son in the act of defending themselves from another person I would sue them. They would have to suck it up. Not my family.

 

[ScottRiqui]

Originally Posted by ScottRiqui
I think one of the companies that advertises in the NRA magazines offers insurance against lawsuits resulting from the lawful use of a firearm. Can't remember the name, though.

Interesting. If you remember the name let me know please, I'm curious what the premium would be.

This is the first hit that came up in a Google search for "NRA civil suit insurance" - There may be other companies that provide similar coverage. Their premiums are $165 or $254 per year, depending on the limits you choose. These prices also include their "Excess Personal Liability" coverage that covers you while hunting, trapping or shooting in competition or at a shooting range.

Even the higher limit ($250k) probably won't be enough to cover a judgement against you in the case of a civil suit where you're found liable, but it should be enough to cover your expenses if you're found not liable.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...Sometimes you are left holding the bag on certain things, but you just have to suck it up...

And that is fundamentally true.

There are a number of factors that need to be thoroughly evaluated and weighed when making a decision about whether or not to sue anyone for anything:

• Liability -- are the facts and law such that there is a basis upon which to hold the defendant legally responsible. Legal liability doesn't necessarily attach to every bad outcome.
• The magnitude of your losses -- can you otherwise bear them without undue, personal financial hardship.
• Cost -- litigation is expensive. Is there a real likelihood that there will be enough money at the end of the line to warrant the expenses of litigation (attorney fees, filing fees, copying expenses, expert witness fees, private investigators, court reporters during discovery, etc.).
• Does the defendant have any money -- unless the defendant has sufficient money or assets (like insurance) from which to pay any judgment, it's a waste of time suing.

...A trial attorney requires at least 700-1000 an hour for being in a courtroom ....

A little on the high side. IME good trial attorneys are around $400 to $600 an hour -- but it has been a few years since I've had occasion to review any bills.

...Then there is the process of collection on a settlement which is a whole other battle....

Collecting on a settlement should never be a problem. The suit doesn't get dismissed until the settlement check has been received, negotiated and the funds deposited in your lawyer's trust account. Collecting on a judgment, however, is another matter entirely.

...Even the higher limit ($250k) probably won't be enough to cover a judgement against you in the case of a civil suit where you're found liable, but it should be enough to cover your expenses if you're found not liable.

A primary reason to carry liability insurance is to assure there are funds available to cover you defense costs.

 

[JWT]

My inclination is not to sue, but it's impossible to determine without complete information on the circumstances.

 

[jgcoastie]

I too am covered by Tricare (retired) and you should know that they will DEFINITELY sue someone who negligently injures you. I know this from personal experience.

That's their business. Tricare suing doesn't mean that I'm suing. Just means that my health expenses are covered and they can use whatever legal resources they deem necessary to accomplish that.

 

[Tennessee Gentleman]

Tricare suing doesn't mean that I'm suing.

Nevertheless they are being sued due to your using that system for your injuries. If you are injured by this shooter and can't speak or write due to your injuries and your parents or spouse sue on your behalf to pay your medical bills is that the same? If you know Tricare will collect from that shooter maybe you shouldn't use their care? Of course that is ridiculous as it is to say "well just suck it up" when you are negligently injured by another.