City employee hits her own car; sues city

[Pope Joan]

Megan Campbell was driving a supply van back from a city storage building on the city's West Side when she turned a corner, causing serious front-bumper damage to a parked car.

The damaged 2001 Nissan Pathfinder in question wasn't just anybody's vehicle. It was her own.

Now, Campbell has filed a claim against the city seeking $1,600 to $1,900 from public coffers for damage caused to her personal vehicle by a city worker -- herself.

"Because I was working for the city and driving the city vehicle, I feel they are responsible for paying for the damage done to my car," Campbell wrote in a "notice of claim" form received this week by the city clerk's office.

http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_ ... car-rented

I was an attorney in general practice for ten years. I both prosecuted and defended tort cases. (with some success)
I believe in lawsuits, more than the general public seems to. I think they help keep honest who might otherwise be inclined to injure others just because they wouldn't care enough. Like doctors.

But come on, now! This plaintiff was a city employee driving a city vehicle, and she hit and badly damaged her own SUV. Now she sues the city? There's got to be a limit to this kind of thing.

Who knows, she might just win. I hope not.

It reminds me of an attorney in Warren County PA who went on to become judge of that county. He represented a man who was bitten by his mother's dog. No, the man did not hate his mother; she simply had homeowners insurance which indemnified her. He won the case, because it is illegal to mention insurance during a personal injury case (!!!)

So yeah, it's not about right or wrong, it's all about the money.

I hope if she wins the city fires her and then sues her for causing them this loss.

Let's have lawsuits, but not like this one.

[Blazedtown]

And people wonder why city governments are broke.

[Grinning Dragon]

So it basically boils down to her not being a very good driver and wants compensation for her shitty driving skills?
Or maybe she did it on purpose.

[Fartsniffage]

She should win as there was damage done to her vehicle by a city employee engaged on official city business.

The city should then garnish the wages of the worker who caused the damage to the tune of any damages awarded and their legal costs in defending the case.

Seems fair to everyone involved.

[Grinning Dragon]

She should win as there was damage done to her vehicle by a city employee engaged on official city business.

The city should then garnish the wages of the worker who cased the damage to the tune of any damages awarded and their legal costs in defending the case.

Seems fair to everyone involved.

OOO, I like this idea.

[Cerbergo]

This is ridiculous and I don't see how this is allowed. She damaged her own vehicle and is now trying to shift the blame to an authority. There's a decent chance she did it on purpose as well, which places it in a similar zone as crashing your car for insurance money. Here's to hoping she gets fired for this *raises glass*

[Conserative Morality]

She should win as there was damage done to her vehicle by a city employee engaged on official city business.

The city should then garnish the wages of the worker who cased the damage to the tune of any damages awarded and their legal costs in defending the case.

Seems fair to everyone involved.

Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.

[Serrian]

Hate to tell you, but the US is one of the only countries where such a case would even be let into court.

[Ikania]

She should win as there was damage done to her vehicle by a city employee engaged on official city business.

The city should then garnish the wages of the worker who caused the damage to the tune of any damages awarded and their legal costs in defending the case.

Seems fair to everyone involved.

Totally unreasonable but totally effective. Me like.

[Sebastianbourg]

She should win as there was damage done to her vehicle by a city employee engaged on official city business.

The city should then garnish the wages of the worker who caused the damage to the tune of any damages awarded and their legal costs in defending the case.

Seems fair to everyone involved.

Best idea so far.

[Lalaki]

Similar suits should still be allowed (in case city operations cause property to be damaged, as in this case). But this is not proper usage of the legal system.

[Ontorisa]

What? This is extremely stupid.

A. Lady, you hit your own car, get over it. Pay for the damage and get it done, don't sue the city.
B. How the hell do you hit your own car?
C. Suing a city for something that is your fault is like me suing my friend whenever I break my phone. It's stupid, really.

[Avaerilon]

Oh good lord... I hope someone walks up to her, slaps her in the face with a giant trout, and tells her plainly that's she's an idiot and an incompetent driver.

[Zunkwentania]

She should win as there was damage done to her vehicle by a city employee engaged on official city business.

The city should then garnish the wages of the worker who caused the damage to the tune of any damages awarded and their legal costs in defending the case.

Seems fair to everyone involved.

That is an excellent idea.

[Greed and Death]

What? This is extremely stupid.

A. Lady, you hit your own car, get over it. Pay for the damage and get it done, don't sue the city.
B. How the hell do you hit your own car?
C. Suing a city for something that is your fault is like me suing my friend whenever I break my phone. It's stupid, really.

She hit her car because the city car's breaks failed due to poor maintenance by the city.

There are other possibilities where she might not be at fault as well, how about we let her make her case?

[Jamjai]

lame excuse

[Pope Joan]

She should win as there was damage done to her vehicle by a city employee engaged on official city business.

The city should then garnish the wages of the worker who caused the damage to the tune of any damages awarded and their legal costs in defending the case.

Seems fair to everyone involved.

Totally unreasonable but totally effective. Me like.

I actually think it is quite reasonable. It maintains current structures of both municipal liability for negligence, and municipal authority to discipline negligent workers.

Assuming that the state wants to retain municipal liability (at least in principle), Fartsniffage's approach lets justice eventually be done, without changing the laws or establishing new precedent.

It is said that "hard cases make bad law"; if we throw her case out because it seems ludicrous, the result could be bad law as far as future municipal claims are concerned.

[Cerbergo]

Oh good lord... I hope someone walks up to her, slaps her in the face with a giant trout, and tells her plainly that's she's an idiot and an incompetent driver.

^Sounds reasonable

[Wisconsin9]

Well, fine. But the employee is clearly incompetent and incapable of doing her job correctly, and as such should be let go.

I'm kidding, of course. This lady's a money-grubbing moron. She should lose the case and then be fired.

[Purpelia]

No person should ever be allowed to sue someone else for damage inured due to their own idiocy. That is my stance on this.

[Cetacea]

But whats up with the US litigation culture - you guys seem to sue for everything. Has it lead to a psyche of entitlement and non-responsibility for ones own indiscretions

She should win as there was damage done to her vehicle by a city employee engaged on official city business.

The city should then garnish the wages of the worker who caused the damage to the tune of any damages awarded and their legal costs in defending the case.

Seems fair to everyone involved.

Thats a great idea. May be go all out and fire her for misuse of her employers vehicle

[British Prussia]

This would never see the light of day in a European Court... Well, it would, but it would piss off the judge.

[Serrian]

Something people need to realise is that this woman is either cripplingly stupid or blisteringly smart.

People have won cases like this. She may just be cashing in on the stupidity of her nation's judicial system.

[Wisconsin9]

But whats up with the US litigation culture - you guys seem to sue for everything. Has it lead to a psyche of entitlement and non-responsibility for ones own indiscretions

She should win as there was damage done to her vehicle by a city employee engaged on official city business.

The city should then garnish the wages of the worker who caused the damage to the tune of any damages awarded and their legal costs in defending the case.

Seems fair to everyone involved.

Thats a great idea. May be go all out and fire her for misuse of her employers vehicle

Canada had a woman sue the people she hit with a car for causing mental anguish.

[British Prussia]

Something people need to realise is that this woman is either cripplingly stupid or blisteringly smart.

People have won cases like this. She may just be cashing in on the stupidity of her nation's judicial system.

Would this sort of case be decided by a judge? Or would there be a jury? Does every American case reach a jury?