NYCkayaker Danger

[Richard Clifford]

NYCKayaker,
    As earnest as many of you folks appear to be you should appreciate 
that we are alive and the kite surfer is the dead guy. His wife is suing 
because that sometimes is all that folks have left for choices. Folks 
here do not know, but might be influenced, were they to learn that he 
left behind 4 sniveling, hungry kids who lost their dad to his own 
stupidity. They now are confronted with crappy financial straights and a 
really bad genetic contribution from the XY side! So, why shouldn't the 
grieving widow give the "greedy" lawyer thing a try? There is a notion 
in the law, that despite everything that might tell a person "no" that 
they say "yes" anyway because the situation created is "an attractive 
nuisance." (torts) Yep, that does happen.

    There is something to be said for the widow's lawsuit. Also, the 
community officials might have known that because of wind and/or tidal 
conditions off their beach(es) in the late Fall or Winter months that 
this type of activity, safe in Summer months, was now different and more 
dangerous and that others had been injured there. (The community may 
have been on notice of an inherently dangerous situation and failed to 
act appropriately to control or limit access to the beach.) And, maybe 
the guy couldn't read English. So, a guard being posted to the site when 
the community 'knew' that kite surfers would appear would have been 
prudent for public safety. (torts)  After all, why would any community 
post a sign warning of any possible danger? It is more than our 
responsibility to use good judgment. Sometimes, some of us need a bit of 
a warning or an alert to potential danger. (Rip current signs at the 
beach??)

    Relax, the town will not incur 'additional' legal expenses as it 
already is protected by a policy of insurance and the duty (of the 
insurance company) to defend on the claim(s).  And, insurance companies 
do not cave in to plaintiff's attorneys just because their client has 
been sued. Man, that would be sweet if that were the way it worked. So, 
there is little or no need really for any of us to get so sanctimonious 
and so, so concerned about the financial well-being of the Connecticut 
shoreline communities. Really, you ought to stop and think about it 
sometime. Or just drive up there. Also, communities are insured. The 
court system (no one has mentioned) is an adversarial system with a 
Judge riding herd over the competing sides. In the Federal Court system 
there are quite specific rules for frivolous litigation, lawsuits and/or 
conduct. Again, relax, take a breath, the Federal Court will save 
Southport's bacon. I have no fears for them, nor do I anticipate or fear 
fence being constructed any time soon. (Personally, I have been 
open-water swimming until November 4 this year regardless of the signage.)

    Now, for a bit more clarity in the discussion(s), we might consider 
moving for a broad-based, no-specific discussion of greedy, nasty 
lawyers and the court system and the abridgment of our personal 
freedoms. .... For example, one cannot go off and kayak anywhere that 
may suit a person simply because the person is "free." Do that just once 
crossing the Ambrose Channel w/o permission and either you are toast 
(see what happened this Summer) or you are holding a ticket with hefty 
fines or you gain a new moniker at home, the defendant! ....

    A better focus for discussion might be .....  let's figure out how 
the events surrounding the death impacts our kayaking experiences. I 
would encourage many to break down the discussion and exchanges into 
something closer to the simple notions of  .........personal right(s) 
................  personal responsibility ........ duty .......public 
safety ......  personal safety ..... or a really great topic: ANSI 
standards!!!! I have plenty more signs that provide warnings that are 
similarly absurd. And, the courts are confronted, every day, with folks 
making claim(s). Essentially our legal world boils down into contract 
law (rights and responsibilities) or tort law (civil rights and wrongs). 
We can consider these two notions with or without the lawyers.

    And, BTW Lee G. does great work both as a lawyer and as a kayaker, 
and, he still appears to be enjoying himself doing both. Interesting 
discussion. Have a great day. Kayak safely. Err on the side of good 
choices. But, now I must work! - Richard Clifford


*-- 

Richard C. Clifford, Esq.
Attorney at Law*
1890 Palmer Avenue, Suite 302
Larchmont, NY 10538

Tel: (914) 834-0100 -or- 0757
Cell: (917) 854-5824
Fax: (914) 834-0888

RichardClifford at earthlink.net 
RichardClifford at NYSBar.com