EP08: Ghost of a Chance

Episode Notes

Transcript

Christine Byers:

Welcome to the Case Doctors. I’m your host, Christine Byers of Simon Law, and I’m joined by the case doctors, John Simon and Alvin Wolf. Now, between them, they have more than 80 years of experience as plaintiff’s attorneys. So there really isn’t a scenario they haven’t already encountered on a case and figured out how to handle it or how not to handle it, as John says. Now, they’re offering you the chance to tell them about the various problems or issues that are coming up in your cases and hear how they would handle it. But first, let’s turn to some of the civil cases making headlines and hear what the case doctors have to say about them. So our first topic brings us over to social media addiction, MDL. I don’t know if you all have heard yet, but the judge has picked the bellwether trial pool.

And the six school districts that are going to be the bellwethers in this case are from Maryland, Georgia, Kentucky, New Jersey, South Carolina, and Arizona. I just wanted to know if you guys thought these were good states and do you wish Missouri or Illinois would have been among them?

John Simon:

I think the venue changes even within the state. As in Missouri, there are certain venues that are more favorable for personal injury cases in Missouri and you go 50 miles in one direction or the other and you get a venue that’s not so favorable.

Christine Byers:

One other topic I was going to bring up relates to the Title IX objections and the NIL settlement appeal, including athletes. And it has to do with athletes. So eight female, former, and current college athletes who previously objected to the Title IX implications of the $2.78 billion settlement between the NCAA and a class of former athletes seeking past name, image, and likeness pay have appealed the final approval of the settlement. Their objection was that with the Division of the Damages tilted heavily to male former athletes and created what they described as a fundamental Title IX problem. The attorney for the athlete plaintiffs called the objector’s appeal disappointing because it’s going to hold up payments to hundreds of thousands of athletes and is based on an objection the court rejected twice.

John Simon:

It might have been some kind of … Trying to alter the settlement a little bit. In other words, a negotiating tactic that if we can’t have … If you don’t agree with us in terms of how the settlement is structured, you threaten to appeal and maybe, I don’t know, maybe they thought they weren’t going to appeal it.

Alvin Wolff:

For these people, they haven’t really been harmed. They haven’t been injured, but they can say they didn’t get enough money. And that’s what these cases are about.

Christine Byers:

Well, thank you, gentlemen. Time now to turn to our email inbox for the cases our viewers have sent in for the case doctors to diagnose. Now, just so everyone knows, we’re not going to reveal where these cases came from. We’re not going to name any names or firms to protect the confidentiality of the cases. Instead, the case doctors are just going to focus on the issue in each of them. So as they say, the case doctors will see you now. Dear case doctors, my client bought a Victorian fixer upper and now claims the house is haunted by an entity known as Margaret, who refuses to let them sleep, turns the lights on and off during Zoom calls. The seller did not disclose any spiritual activity, though the neighbors confirmed the house is definitely cursed. We filed a civil suit for non-disclosure of paranormal interference, but opposing counsel filed a motion to dismiss, claiming the ghost has not been deposed.

How do I prove damages from spectral harassment? Is it time to subpoena a medium?

John Simon:

You need a hell of an expert for that case. You

Alvin Wolff:

Have to call Dr. Venkman from Ghostbusters. Have him reprise his role.

John Simon:

So that’s an interesting case and we’re sitting here laughing about it, but you’re familiar with the lemp mansion in St. Louis?

Christine Byers:

Absolutely, yes.

John Simon:

And that’s like top 10 lists of one of the most haunted places in the country. Do you remember the case? And there was somebody that sued the mansion and they said that they were on one of the upper floors by themselves in a room and one of the drawers in a dresser came flying out and hit them.

Christine Byers:

Oh, dear.

John Simon:

And fell on. They were injured. And that was part of the case, that it just came out on its own and they weren’t rooting through the drawer and opening and looking at it. But back to this one, I would say, look, if you want to depose them, serve them with a subpoena and good luck.

Alvin Wolff:

Well- Can you akin it to buying a house that a murder was committed in? Because those cases- That’s kind of what I was thinking. Those houses always lose value. If someone killed themselves in the house, I mean, who would want to-

John Simon:

And another angle on that is you don’t need to prove that … I don’t think you need to prove that there’s a ghost. I think you just need to show that there was an understanding in a certain segment of the community that this house was haunted, right? In other words, as long as it has the reputation of being haunted, whether it’s haunted or not, really doesn’t matter. If it affects the value of the house, I mean-

Alvin Wolff:

Let’s go back to duty. Is there a duty to disclose that a house is haunted? I think that’s the first-

John Simon:

I think there is. …

Alvin Wolff:

Hurdle that you have to go over.

John Simon:

I think there is. If it diminishes the value of the house and it might affect a buyer’s decision on what they’re going to pay, I think you need to disclose it. I think there’s a duty.

Alvin Wolff:

How do you prove that a house is haunted?

John Simon:

That I don’t know. That I don’t know.

Christine Byers:

Well, but he said by reputation alone, you could. If it has a stigma to it and the community and everyone else knows. In Bo

John Simon:

Dire, you just asked the panel who would be willing to spend the night and anybody who says no, that’s who you want on your jury. That’s

Christine Byers:

Right.

Alvin Wolff:

I think these people don’t have a ghost of a chance. Yeah. Okay.

Christine Byers:

What happened?

John Simon:

Well, here’s the thing. We’re deposing the ghost, I’m assuming they’re not serious about that, but that case has other problems. The case has other problems for sure, but I think the best angle is towards, if you know something that’s going to diminish the value or what people are willing to pay, whether somebody got killed in the house, killed themselves in the house, you should disclose it, right? And that’s a law. The whole saying of full and complete disclosure, disclose it.

Christine Byers:

All right. So our next email is, “Dear case doctors, I need urgent guidance. My client brought their registered emotional support dog named Justice to a high end wedding as a plus one. During the ceremony, justice became startled by the string quartet and ran into a towering wedding cake, toppled the ceremonial arch, and knocked the bride over in the process. Now the bride is suing my client for emotional distress, venue damages, and quote, symbolic desecration. The dog was legally allowed under the ESA policy, but was the dog emotionally stable? Can I even mount a defense?

John Simon:

Here’s an idea. I’m thinking about leash laws. Was the dog on a leash? Was the wedding in a county where there was a leash law, right? Or

Alvin Wolff:

Was the dog under control of the owner? Sometimes it’s either- I’m

John Simon:

Thinking negligence per se. I mean, if there’s a leash law and the dog’s not on the leash, it’s

Alvin Wolff:

Negligence. Well, except you don’t have a bite.

John Simon:

Yeah, you don’t need a bite. Well- It’s actually property. It’s only property damage, right?

Alvin Wolff:

But if it’s a bite, you got strict liability. If it’s just property damage, you just have to prove negligence. Now, I had a case once where I have two Corgis and we had a house sitter and it’s not … I can’t … The Corgi’s got in a fight, all right? And the house there- With each

John Simon:

Other?

Alvin Wolff:

With each other.

John Simon:

Yeah.

Alvin Wolff:

The house sitter picked up the dog and it turned around and bit her lip off.

John Simon:

Oh my goodness.

Christine Byers:

Oh, dear.

Alvin Wolff:

And now that was strict liability, even though we told her if the dogs fight, just let them fight.

John Simon:

Let them fight.

Alvin Wolff:

Yeah.

John Simon:

Yeah.

Alvin Wolff:

And this thing went on for years.

John Simon:

Wow.

Alvin Wolff:

And it was very expensive for me and my wife. Our insurance got canceled. The dogs were excluded on the Lloyd’s London policy. But the same company that canceled me kept my policy on my other house in Colorado and they didn’t exclude the dogs there. So you’re

John Simon:

Living in Colorado.

Alvin Wolff:

No, it didn’t matter where they were. They’re still homeowners. But anyway, there’s a whole bunch of different set of laws for dogs that jump on someone versus dogs that bite someone.

John Simon:

Yeah. It reminds me of a case I had where the … I represented … My client attended a wedding and she was up in an area on a balcony where they say she wasn’t supposed to be. It was a home they rented for the wedding and she was leaning over to take a picture of the bride and groom coming in the house and the railing broke and she fell down right on the floor and right in front of the bride and the groom-

Christine Byers:

Oh dear.

John Simon:

You’re laughing.

Alvin Wolff:

So are

John Simon:

You. It’s not funny. You made

Alvin Wolff:

Me laugh.

John Simon:

What made Matters a little more difficult was she was the former girlfriend of the bride, of the groom. Of the

Alvin Wolff:

Groom.

John Simon:

Of the groom. And let me tell you, there were some heated depositions and exchanges, but there were legal issues in the case. It all got resolved, but the railing shouldn’t have failed and had it not failed, she wouldn’t have fallen, but we had all of these other issues that made it a very, very interesting case.

Alvin Wolff:

You can’t make this shit up.

John Simon:

Yeah. So was that case filed with your dogs?

Alvin Wolff:

Oh yeah.

John Simon:

Where was it? It was in the county, St. Louis County?

Alvin Wolff:

Yeah.

John Simon:

Did it go to trial?

Alvin Wolff:

No.

John Simon:

Got it resolved.

Alvin Wolff:

It got resolved.

John Simon:

Okay. All right.

Alvin Wolff:

And-

John Simon:

I didn’t handle that case, did I? Our office?

Alvin Wolff:

No. In fact, the lawyer who had the case left money on the table.

John Simon:

Ah, okay. You want to tell them that here in the-

Alvin Wolff:

Healthcare. It’s been years. Statute, can’t reopen it.

John Simon:

Statute’s gone, right?

Alvin Wolff:

Right.

John Simon:

Well, I would say good luck with that. I’d still go … The control is a way to go, but check out the leash law too.

Alvin Wolff:

Well, zone of danger for emotional distress. You’ve got that … What’s that case? Acero versus-

John Simon:

The

Alvin Wolff:

California case? No, no, no.

John Simon:

Missouri?

Alvin Wolff:

Yeah. It’s an emotional distress case where you got to be in the zone of danger.

John Simon:

Oh yeah, right, right. And if I’m recalling that case, if there’s any physical impact at all, that the burden is less in terms of what you have to prove medically. In other words, if, for instance, the dog knocked over the cake and a piece of the cake flew and hit the bride, say in somewhere in the cheek or the arm, that’s physical contact, which would mean that you don’t need … The emotional distress doesn’t need to be medically diagnosable, I think. I think that’s what the case law says.

Alvin Wolff:

Okay. What if it’s just like- So

John Simon:

Ask her about the cake, whether any of that cake hit … The reason I say that

Alvin Wolff:

Is I had a- Was it Chifon cake or was it a very dense cake?

John Simon:

So you’re familiar with the law with emotional distress. If you’re in the zone of danger and there’s no physical impact, it needs to be medically diagnosable distress. But if there is physical impact, it doesn’t need to be medically diagnosable, the distress to be compensable. Yes. And I had a case years ago where a horrible case, it was somebody changing a tire on the side of a highway, on the shoulder of a highway, and he was in the back of the car the day and his family members were up on the grass and a car came by and slammed into the car behind him and killed him. And there was a policy in the car with … It was like a 100, 200, and they paid the 100 for the

Christine Byers:

Guy who

John Simon:

Was killed, the father who was killed. And the other 200, I claimed zone of danger for the other 200. And part of that was there was actually debris from the crash- That hit him. That hit him. Not big like a piece of fender, but gravel dust. And it didn’t matter how much, but it allowed us to submit on that without it being medically diagnosable. But anyway, good luck with the wedding case.

Christine Byers:

Good luck getting justice.

John Simon:

Yes. Yes.

Christine Byers:

Okay, gentlemen, that will do it for this episode of The Case Doctors. If you have a case that you would like case doctors to dissect, send us an email at [email protected]. Once again, we will be keeping all names and cases confidential. Thank you for joining us and we will see you next time on The Case Doctors.

Continue Reading