On 7/14/06, Daniel=20 Reeves <dreeves Æ umich.edu>=20 wrote:

Let's=20 discuss by email and just have poll results on the = whiteboard.
(Updating=20 whiteboard now -- pasting responses below for the
improvetheworld = archives.  The original email is below if you missed=20 it.)

Quick responses:
  Yes, the lawyer is a = kind and=20 decent one (in fact, a fellow cyclist,
recommended highly by the = bike=20 club president) who has offered to deal
with the baseline = insurance=20 claims -- hospital and bike -- for Bethany pro
bono and who did = not push=20 in the slightest for anything in the JUSTICE
argument (which in = fact was=20 all me).
  The "nine iron" hypothetical was purely a = mental=20 exercise to decide on
what the right amount might = be.  If the=20 answer is "infinity" then all the
more reason to get something = rather=20 than nothing.
  The point about future expenses (like = dental)=20 is a really good one.
  I don't know about other = charges=20 against the driver.  Maybe Bethany can
reply about that = (I know=20 she can only type one-handed -- the hand with the
broken thumb! = -- so=20 far though.)

Snapshot of the straw poll at
http://ai.eec= s.umich.edu/people/dreeves/wb/cycling

  =20 THE ANTI-LITIGATION ARGUMENT:

Rob Felty - although I am not = totally=20 against litigation, I think that my
opinion is different enough = from the=20 rest to justify putting it under
anti-litigation.  I am = opposed=20 to suing for pain and suffering, because I
feel that it is not = possible=20 to quantify in terms of dollars (or yootles
for that matter -- I = do think=20 that desires can be quantified, but I think
it is more difficult = to=20 quantify pain and suffering). I would be in favor
of suing for = lost=20 compensation, medical expenses, etc., which certainly
are = quantifiable.=20 From my understanding, most insurance already covers
lost = compensation to=20 some extent in these cases, though if one earns quite
a bit of = money, it=20 would probably not cover it. I also disagree with
Danny's example = of=20 allowing one to get hit in the face with a nine iron.
This is = completely=20 different, because of the intentions involved. As
others have = said, this=20 was clearly an accident, and not done with = intent.
  Other=20 parameters to consider. I do believe that the people who profit = the
most=20 from such cases are the lawyers. Also consider that frequently the=20
monetary amount of these cases is frequently highly influenced = by=20 the
wealth of the person being sued. And I think that many = lawyers=20 probably
try to convince their clients to sue for as much as = possible.=20 Also
consider the time and energy spent in suing someone. This = gets down=20 to the
details. If one feels that $10,000 is an appropriate = amount to sue=20 for,
and the case would be settled in two months, it seems worth = the=20 trouble.
If one only sues for $1,000 and the case takes two = years, then=20 it does not
seem worth it to me.
  All that being = said, it=20 is ultimately Bethany's decision, and I will
support whatever = that is,=20 should she choose to make it publicly known. And
I hope that she = recovers fully, and I am very angry at the person who=20 hit
her.

   THE JUSTICE ARGUMENT:

Matt = Rudary -=20 To me, this is not even a difficult question. This situation
is = precisely=20 the reason that these types of damages were introduced in the =
first=20 place. As Danny's analysis indicated, Bethany's loss here is = more
than=20 just the dollar amount on the hospital bills. Clearly, asking for=20 an
amount that is enough to set Bethany up for a life of luxury = would be=20
inappropriate. But some amount between $10k and $10M would be=20 reasonable
and just.

JMM - Bethany suffered a greater loss = than=20 the $$ cost of hospital etc.
Pain, fear that may affect the way = she lives=20 her life in the future, etc.
There is good reason to believe = that this=20 was not mere chance, a roll of
the dice: the driver did not = exercise=20 reasonable caution, performed
negligently, and thus is the direct = and=20 responsible cause of Bethany's
loss.  It is reasonable = to ask=20 that the loss be compensated.  It is
socially = responsible, and=20 efficient (because of incentives) for people to
be the reasonably = forseeable costs of their own actions.  (There is also a =
good=20 social argument for *punitive* damages as a deterrent for = other
drivers,=20 but usually imposing that punishment is the role of the state.
Do = you=20 know if the county prosecutor is contemplating filing charges for=20
criminal negligence or reckless endangerment or some = such?)

KML -=20 I second jeff's opinion and think matt's lower bound is too=20 low.
   reply by Matt: I agree, I just took the numbers = from=20 Danny's e-mail.

Dave - I'd definitely ask for something, = though not=20 millions of dollars,
or even hundreds of k. At an absolute bare = minimum,=20 compensation for lost
wages from time off work, and compensation = for time=20 in general spent at
the hospital etc. More reasonably it should = also=20 include some additional
for pain and suffering. Maybe it's not = reasonable=20 to say that there's a
price where you'd actually agree to being = hit by a=20 truck, but maybe
there's a point where post-facto the = unhappiness of=20 having had to go
through it all is balanced by "but hey, check = out the=20 sweet giant screen
plasma television I bought to watch movies = while I was=20 recouping" or some
such. Or "check out my sweet new hybrid=20 car".
  The ideal solution would be to come to some = rational=20 agreement to such
with the driver and settle everything out of = court=20 without involving
lawyers and letting everything get thus = inflated. But=20 since the money is
likely coming from the driver's insurance = rather than=20 his pocket, this may
not be possible. You'd probably have to = convince the=20 insurance company
that if they don't come to a reasonable = settlement out=20 of court then they
will be facing a huge lawsuit, even if in = reality=20 it's not worth going
through. Unless, of course, the corporate = machine of=20 the insurance world
tried to deny you anything reasonable because = they=20 could, in which case my
instinct changes to wanting to not let = them get=20 away with that, since via
intimidation of random folks they = probably=20 usually do.

CK - I would think that above and beyond medical = bills,=20 missed pay for
work, bike replacement costs, and costs for her=20 caretakers' travel
expenses and missed work there should be some = other=20 compensation for her
loss.  When I was visiting, I saw = that the=20 man who hit her had sent her
flowers with a note that basically = said=20 "Sorry for the inconvenience". I
believe it was a sincere = gesture, with=20 the wrong choice of words. While he
is an older man, that does = not give=20 him the right to less strict penalty
for his = actions.  We all=20 know he didn't hit Bethany on purpose and so that
makes it = difficult to=20 rationalize punishing him, however, I think it is
important that = we teach=20 a lesson to all drivers about operating their
vehicles around=20 bicycles.  In his case, I believe he should have = his
license=20 taken away.  Someone THAT oblivious to what is going on = should=20 not
be on the road - innocent grandpa or not.  I do = feel for=20 him, as he may
not have a lot of money or health insuarance = himself=20 because of our
country's disrespect for the health of the elderly = who are=20 not well-off,
but nonetheless, this should not be taken lightly. = My=20 impression is that
this will not be stopping Bethany from going = out=20 again, allbeit with extra
caution, but it is impossible that = this=20 experience would not affect her
psychologically in some=20 way.
  No matter how brave she is (and she is very), = this=20 qualifies as a
traumatic experience that would not have happened = if it=20 weren't for a
negligent driver.  Therefore, I vote for = justice.  I have NO idea how to
place an amount of = money on=20 this, as I don't know the extent of the
medical bills, etc., but = I would=20 imagine they are over 10k themselves.  I
suppose that = is what=20 a lawyer is for. One more point: while I agree that
our country = has=20 gotten out of hand about lawsuits, this is QUITE different
from = someone=20 falling on the freshly mopped floors of Meijer and it is
clear = that=20 Bethany is not out to make money due to her=20 misfortune.  She
deserves justice, = however.

Monica - I=20 agree with Dave, but Insurance companies plan on people=20 suing
them.  They hire entire teams of lawyers just for = this.  There could be
future complications and = surgeries after=20 the statute of limitations runs
out; there could be scars, or = more=20 permanent damages.  Along with lost
wages, there should = be=20 compensation for the other things Bethany would be
doing in lieu = of=20 recovering, and all possible future problems need to be
accounted = for in=20 an initial law suit. Also, there is nothing Bethany did
to = instigate=20 this.  Its very different from suing the surgeon who = messed
up=20 breast implants.  Somebody broke the law (running a stop = sign),=20 and
severely hurt an otherwise healthy person.  I guess = it=20 comes down to what
price can you put on enjoyment of life? Paying = for you=20 to have an extra
luxury in the future is the way insurance = companies say=20 they are sorry.
  If this accident had been the other = way=20 around: If Bethany had been
recklessly driving a truck and hit a=20 grandfather on a bicycle (or in a
wheelchair), his injuries = would=20 probably have been more severe, or he
would have = died.  This=20 could have resulted in a vehicular manslaughter
charge, loss of = license,=20 and insurance would have paid his family for
their emotional loss = (far=20 more than the price of the bike and = hospital
bills).

Eugene - as=20 an economist-wannabe, I would certainly agree with Danny,
Chris, = Jeff,=20 and others, thereby putting me in the "justice" bracket. =
However, I feel=20 that several things need to be taken into consideration
here = also. First=20 of all, do we really believe that punitive measures stop
reckless = drivers? In theory, they certainly should if drivers are =
rational. But=20 then again, I suspect that anyone (or at least most people)
who = hits a=20 pedestrian is probably going to go through some emotional
trauma = as a=20 result. At least I am sure I would.  Not to say, of = course,=20
that they shouldn't be held responsible for their actions, but = to=20 suggest
that perhaps the problem isn't fundamentally about = incentives=20 (unless
punishments are extremely severe).  Second, we = often=20 hear about the
"jerks" who take advantage of the legal system. = I'd like=20 to suggest that
perhaps many of them go through the same = cognitive=20 process as us right
now, reaching perhaps the same conclusions. = And since=20 it's very difficult
as an outsider to tell whether they are = merely=20 rationalizing their actions
or genuinely pursuing the same agenda = as us,=20 perhaps we should be careful
judging other = lawsuits.  Finally,=20 the question of what is just in a given
situation is a patently=20 difficult one. After all, justice is frequently
another name for=20 revenge.  Having said all this, I certainly believe = that
pain,=20 suffering, and lost wages require compensation. The real question =
is,=20 how much...

> You've checked with a lawyer to see = what=20 options you have in Michigan?
>
> Anyway, with injuries = of this=20 sort I think there's a reasonable potential
> for long-term = problems,=20 particularly dental.  I think it would be
> = appropriate to=20 try to obtain some amount of money as a buffer for that, = plus
> for=20 Bethany's opportunity costs.
>
> If she finds this = morally=20 ambiguous, she can always put the money away, only
> using it = for=20 injury related costs and bestow it on some worthwhile = charity
> later=20 in life when it's clear she'll no longer bear any costs = associated
>=20 with the accident.
>
> -Brian
>
> On = 7/14/06, Daniel=20 Reeves <dreeves Æ umich.edu>=20 wrote:
>>
>> Here are two points of view on = whether=20 Bethany should ask for more than
>> just reimbursement for = the=20 hospital bill plus cost of her bike.  Please
>> = chime in=20 with your opinion!  It could be very=20 influential.
>>
>> The ANTI-LITIGATION=20 argument:
>>    No, this represents the = worst=20 of what's wrong with this country.  Don't
>> use=20 elaborate rationalizations for being a greedy opportunist cashing in =
>> on misfortune.  This kind of lawsuit is an = absolutely=20 massive drain on
>> society, both in wasted money and in = missed=20 opportunities / paranoia
>> ("sorry, we can't do that for = liability=20 reasons").  Don't be a part of it! =
>>
>> The=20 JUSTICE argument:
>>    Asking for much = more=20 than the actual hospital and bike costs is the
>> morally = right=20 thing to do.  Agreed that abuse of the legal system (or=20 the
>> brokenness of the system itself) is a huge and = despicable=20 problem.  It
>> would be wrong, for example, to = go for=20 punitive damages.  But asking the
>> driver to = redress=20 your pain and suffering and lost productivity (if not
>> = done=20 disingenuously) is absolutely legitimate.  As we know from = yootles,
>> these have a measurable price. If the driver = (bear=20 with the absurd
>> hypotheticalness of this) asked you if = he could=20 smash up your face with a
>> nine iron for 10 million = dollars,=20 you'd say yes (assume of course ex post
>> analysis, ie, = knowing=20 the surgery would succeed, etc).  If he offered = 10
>>=20 thousand, you'd say no. (Adjust the spread if I'm presuming=20 wrong.)
>> Somewhere in between is the fair and just amount = he=20 should give you.
>>    The difference = between=20 this and greedy opportunists is a fundamental
>>=20 one.  The difference between "you ran a stop sign and = smashed my=20 face in
>> with your truck" and "I slipped in your grocery = store"=20 is as clear as day.
>> There are a lot of selfish assholes = abusing=20 the concept of liability but
>> that doesn't mean you have = to err=20 on the other extreme, refusing to hold
>> someone fully = liable for=20 life-and-death negligence.
>>
>>
>> = Straw Poll=20 here:
>>    http://ai.eec= s.umich.edu/people/dreeves/wb/cycling
>>
>>=20 --
>> http://ai.eecs.umich.edu= /people/dreeves  -=20 -  search://"Daniel = Reeves"
>>
>>   If=20 God dwells inside us, like some people say, I sure hope he=20
>>   likes enchiladas, because that's what He's=20 getting!
>>     -- Jack=20 Handey
>>
>

--
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu= /people/dreeves=20   - -  search://"Daniel=20 Reeves"

    Last night I lay in bed = looking up at=20 the
    stars in the sky and I thought to=20 myself,
    "Where is the=20 ceiling?!"