As some may or may not know there is a wrongful death suit playing out against the city after the the recent tragedy at Falls Park. Some in the legal world are watching this closely. Why?
Well, see, a few years back a guy jumped in a South Dakota public lake and suffered a spinal cord injury. He sued. He won (around $11 million). Next legislative session state law was changed so if you do something like that in a public park in South Dakota you can’t sue the state.
Fast forward to 2018. It will be curious what angle will be taken in this new case. How will the victim’s attorney (I hear it is Brendan Johnson) prove the city was liable for not warning visitors about the dangers of foam at Falls Park? How will personable responsibility play out in this case?
Some have argued that no amount of safety measures can protect people from their own ignorance at Falls Park. Maybe they are right?
There have been some good suggestions like memorial ‘Why Die’ signs. Others have suggested the signs warning of the dangerous waters were larger. Some have said fencing and special platforms. I have been suggesting for several years we have signs warning of the extreme toxicity of the water. It’s one thing to warn people about water turbulence, it’s whole other thing to warn people that the water is actually poisonous. I guess the EPA and the state DENR suggested this also to the former mayor and he refused to put up the signs because he didn’t want to ‘scare’ tourists. Isn’t that the point?
This case will be one to watch.
The Public Assurance Alliance will be funding the legal defense, and if they lose will have to pay out the claim. I suspect this may go all the way to the SD Supreme Court.
We need a FT park warden there. Instructing people to stay back and some signs wouldn’t hurt either….
I would agree. Paying someone $50K a year would go much farther than the hundreds of thousands of dollars we blow on marketing SF, Holiday Lights at Falls park, etc. I would also pay the salary out of the CVB Bid Tax since this person should be well-versed in the history of the city and could act as docent of the park as well.
What kind of warnings do they have at Niagara Falls?
Likely, this case goes into SD Supreme Court. What most don’t know is the city regularly loses in state court. They use Strong Mayor Charter and the unconstitutional judicial ordinance to ignore the decision and state court doesn’t enforce. Someone dies and government further punishes with 100k in legal expense.
I might also add, that the City by cleaning up the Falls area did not only create a credible tourist spot, but they also established a liability for themselves with a duty; and it is time for the City to understand and accept this duty and stop trying to ignore or sweep such a duty under the rug….
#OwnTheResponsibility
After living in a state with seriously rugged wilderness this seems so silly to me. It’s assumed that there is an inherent risk in hiking in the mountains or other natural areas with varied footing. Families here don’t sue the state or Fed when someone takes a fall and dies because they understand the inherent danger.
The falls are slippery and there are quite a few spots where it’s easy to fall in. You can take one look at them and make this judgement immediately. Why fence this place of natural beauty off? People will fall and die with or without fencing. When you go rock hopping at the falls you’re accepting the inherent risk involved; it’s not the City’s fault if you fall.
I disagree, it is “the City’s fault if you fall.” Because the City has created a duty for itself; and I think it is safe to say that there is a direct correlation between the number of increased drownings happening at the Falls and the Falls ares having been cleaned up and made more inviting.
And ‘Anonymoose,’ if you know an other area of the country, regardless of who owns it, that has seen an increase in tragic events then that needs to be address too by its owner.
Trust me if a homeowner can be sued for someone slipping on a sidewalk, a sidewalk which the property owner does not own, then certainly we can all see the duty that the City has created for itself with its updates to the Falls.
Because government is suppose to work for the people and not kill the people.
#LibertariansAreTheWorldsBiggestIdealists
Whether they have created a duty for themselves or not can be argued. Of course if more people visit more people will fall in. That’s not the city’s fault, it’s just statistics.
You’re demonstrating the point of my comment with your reply. It’s a cultural issue. Oddly, I live on the left coast where we’re all supposed to be sue happy liberals. In reality, that does not appear to be the case. I’d think a conservative city like Sioux Falls would be full of folks that support personal responsibility; seems maybe I’m wrong.