PTravel

I can't be responsible for what you read and see. I've stated the legal standard for negligence in the U.S., i.e. falling below the duty of care owed to the person claiming injury.

I have no idea where you've seen this. Roads in the U.S. are not maintained by private corporations but by the government. The "everybody knew" aspect goes to assumption of risk which, again, is a question of fact, and part of the determination. In the U.S., we have affirmative defenses, i.e. even assuming the truth of the allegations of the complaint, defenses to liability can be asserted.

No case like this would ever be brought in the U.S., nor would it be defended on basis that you suggested.

missydarlin

^

Maybe $5,000 to cover a lifetime supply of concealing makeup and vitamin e capsules...and thats being generous!

But please... $50K for a little scar on your forehead?

I have a friend who sports a 1 inch scar on their forehead attained at a Starwood property. They were a little too ...shall we say "into the moment" , and misgauged the relation of their forehead to the nightstand.

Maybe they should sue too!!

Flying Lawyer

The road in front of your supermarket connecting the parking lot with the public road is certainly private. And however: Please accept a bit of ability to abstract. In Europe our legal thinking is not governed by precedent but by abstract concepts. And the general concept I experience when travelling and working in both worlds is that in the US responsibility for your own actions rarely rests with yourself but most of the time somebody else is held responsible for what we understand as accidents whereas outside the US accidents are more widely accepted simply as bad luck.

It will not help now to start a philosophical discussion about "accident" and "negligence" because the concepts are different notwithstanding the same vocabulary. Cases like the tobacco judgements or the McDonalds hot coffee judgement are cases that would have never been successful in most parts of Europe, however were successful in the US.

PTravel

That's called a "drive way."

Again, I can't be responsible for you erroneous understanding of American law.

Whose discussing philosophy? The statement was made that all accidents are considered compensable in the U.S. That is patently false, given that the standard used is "negligence," which has a distinct meaning that permits distinguishing between non-compensable accidents and compensable injury.

What tobacco judgments?

I would suggest you are entirely unfamiliar with the facts surrounding the McDonalds hot coffee judgment.

Flying Lawyer

Thanks for this kind and polite education. If your German or French were as good or bad as my English we could certainly continue this discussion in my language. And my "erroneous understanding of American law" was at least tought by a US law school located within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and it was good enough to pass a bar exam.

Flying Lawyer

The patently false assumption is that there is a globally valid standard for "negligence". Furthermore there is no global standard for "contributory negligence" and last but not least, there is globally valid definition of "fate".

PTravel

Then you understand the standard of negligence and I have no idea what point you are trying to make.

PTravel

I never said that there is. You said this:

"To what I read and see there is always somebody responsible in the US."

That is a demonstrably wrong statement, both practically and legally. I've provided the U.S. standard for negligent liability, one which, presumably, you learned when you attended that law school in Massachusetts.

And no one ever suggested that there were. Perhaps you should review your own statements in this thread.

Flying Lawyer

You still fail to understand that there is no globally valid standard of negligence. The concept of negligence in China is different from the concept of negligence in the US and the concept of negligence in Europe. Maybe the difference is not even by definition but by implementation.

You further fail to consider that every incdident or accident can have several root causes caused by negligence at both ends, the injured person and the violator. And you fail to understand that the concept of "fate" is by far more important in jurisdictions other than the US.

PTravel

Europe is irrelevant to this discussion. I don't know the standard of negligence in China and, I suspect, neither do you. That's what I suggested consulting counsel. The concept in the U.S., however, is very clear, and it is far from clear that the Starwood corporate parent, which is domiciled in the U.S., is not liable under principles of respondeat superior for the actions of the bellman in China.

"Fate" is irrelevant in the U.S. Please explain what relevance European concepts of negligence have to (1) this discussion, and (2) your erroneous statement that, ""To what I read and see there is always somebody responsible in the US."

Flying Lawyer

You are fully right, fate is unknown and not accepted in the US. This is why I still hold that the US system alway tries to hold somebody responsible and in most instances this is successful. Quod erat demonstrandum.

Rest assured. I am pretty much familiar with China, because I am in charge of a professional organisation dealing with China legal relations. And Europe was only used as an example because I (maybe different from you) have worked with concepts in different European jurisdctions, in the US and in China. I could have used Australia or South Africa too, but I am not familiar with these.

To bring this to an end: My European education is not based on precedent but on abstract concepts and we use these concepts for the sake of discussion. Your US education is based on precedent, this provokes a fully different style of legal thinking and discussion. However, your style of discussion appears to be trained by cross examination. But this is certainly not what we are doing here. I believe we are going far off topic and so much I am enjoying this, we should stop it.

PTravel

Fallacious logic. "Standard of care" is a far more objective standard than, "fate," and clearly differentiates between liability and non-liability in a negligence situation. If you were correct in your assertion about the U.S. standard, virtually all negligence actions would succeed which, of course, they do not.

Fine. Then why don't you tell us the standard used in China.

Again, the concepts used outside the U.S. are irrelevant to your continued assertion that, "To what I read and see there is always somebody responsible in the US."

Fine.

CNWO4LIFE

How do you mistake fish for chicken? Texture, taste, and general appearance are completely different.

CNWO4LIFE

A "friend"? lol! Your secret is safe with me!

4Health

What type of doctor stitched up your gf's forehead? It is too late to do anything else at this point to minimize the scarring. Hopefully she won't develop a keloid. If you are still in Shanghai, try to find a western trained ENT at one of the expat hospitals or a plastic surgeon that specializes in facial plastic surgery. You don't want one that does breast augmentation. Someone that might be able to provide a high quality consultation is a plastic surgeon that specializes in blepharoplasty for asian eyes (i.e., double eyelid creation). Good luck and I hope your girlfriend isn't too distraught because after a few years, any scarring will be virtually unnoticeable. In the meantime, make-up will do a wonderful job at hiding any scar that may form. But, make sure that she doesn't wear any make-up until it is FULLY healed (give it at least two months)! And tell her not to make a lot of facial expressions until the stitches come out because every time she wrinkles her forehead she is pulling on those stitches which will result in more damage. Check your PMs when you get a chance.