Colorado man sues first responders

dakcp2001

<font color=darkorchid>Am I wrong to want a cashie
Joined
Jun 8, 2007
What do you all think of this?


http://www.denverpost.com/breakingn...-man-rescued-from-rock-creek-during-september


A Broomfield man who was rescued from his submerged car during the September floods has filed papers indicating he might sue his rescuers and first responders.

Roy Ortiz was rescued by North Metro Fire Rescue District and others who responded to the scene after his car was washed off the road on Sept. 12. He says crews took too long to respond to the accident after he became trapped in his upside-down car near the intersection of U.S. 287 and Dillon Road in Lafayette.

He also claims the road should have been closed, thus the accident that left him trapped in the submerged car would never have happened.

No lawsuit has yet been filed, but Ortiz's lawyer, Aurora attorney Ed Ferszt, has filed a legal document that is a typical precursor to filing a lawsuit against a government agency.

A number of cars went into Rock Creek on Sept. 12, when Dillon Road washed out. Roy Ortiz, who was among those rescued from their vehicles, could sue emergency responders claiming they did not rescue him quickly enough. ( David R. Jennings )


The document, called a government immunity notice, is addressed to agencies in the cities of Boulder, Broomfield, Westminster and Lafayette. The document specifically names Boulder County sheriff's deputies, a member of the Westminster dive team, Broomfield and North Metro Fire Rescue District.

The document claims first responders, Boulder County Sheriff's deputy Jeannette Cunning and Sgt. Mike Linden, and an unnamed member of the Westminster dive team, failed to see Ortiz was trapped in the car, and that he ended up spending two hours submerged in Rock Creek until he was rescued.

In the document, Ferszt stated Ortiz survived “by pure grace.”

David Hughes, Boulder deputy county attorney, said Boulder will investigate the claim, “which is what we do with all notices of claim,” he said.

The document also states the road should have been closed and marked as dangerous.

If Broomfield had closed the road, Ortiz would not have suffered physical trauma, such as hypothermia and muscle spasms, and would not have suffered property damage and emotional distress, the document states.

Ortiz has incurred about $40,000 in medical bills from the accident, and about $500,000 in total damages, according to the document.

Sara Farris, a spokeswoman for North Metro Fire, said the document was sent to the fire department and other agencies who responded to the accident, but the fire department has not received word about further action.

Ferszt did not immediately respond to calls for comment from the Enterprise, but in a CBS 4 story, he said it was “unfortunate to have to try and cast liability and responsibility for this act of God on the men and women who risked their own lives.”

CBS 4 reported that Ortiz reluctantly filed a notice of intent to sue because he needs help paying medical bills.

Farris said North Metro realizes Ortiz's ordeal was traumatic, but said responders did all they could to rescue him.

“We sympathize with what he went through,” she said. “Given the challenging conditions, we feel our responders performed well and professionally.”

News of potential legal action comes nearly six months after Ortiz was rescued from his submerged car during the historic floods in September.

Ortiz, who was driving to work on Sept. 12 on Dillon Road near U.S 287, saw the street was washed out by flood waters. He tried to stop, but became trapped in his car when a bridge collapse caused him to slide off the road into Rock Creek.

In September, Ortiz said he called his wife when he fell off the road, then called 911. Before he could get out of his car, two more vehicles on the road crashed into the same creek, causing his car to flip over in the water.

Ortiz said he survived by positioning his head in a small air bubble near the back of his car, but the sound of the flood waters made it impossible for him to yell for help.

"Everywhere I moved, there was the water," he said. "Two hours was an eternity."

North Metro Fire personnel rescued him from his submerged car. Farris said records indicate rescuers had Ortiz out of the car in just a little more than an hour after the 911 call was received.

Ortiz and his rescuers shared an emotional moment after Ortiz was released from the hospital on Sept. 13, where, at a press conference, he thanked North Metro for rescuing him and said his faith in God helped keep him calm during the flood.

Jim Chalat, a Denver personal injury lawyer not related to the case, said it is not uncommon for people to sue public entities such as ambulance companies or fire departments. To win a case, however, the plaintiff must be able to show that the company showed “gross deviation from reasonable care” or that the plaintiff received care or services that caused them a significant or unreasonable injury.

“It would have to be a type of “Oh my God” screw-up,” he said.


Read more: Broomfield man rescued from Rock Creek during September floods could sue his rescuers - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/breakingn...rom-rock-creek-during-september#ixzz2vf48bCkt
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse
Follow us: @Denverpost on Twitter | Denverpost on Facebo

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/10/roy-ortiz-may-sue-rescuers_n_4936804.html
 
It's a general principle of law that governmental agencies have immunity from suit for exercising governmental functions. There are also a lot of exceptions to this principle.

I'm no expert, but based on the news article, I don't see how any of the exceptions would apply.

Well maybe the failure to close the road...that seems like a possibility.


But the failure to rescue him earlier? No, I don't think so.
 
Idiot. Just another symptom of what is wrong in our country. No one takes any personal responsibility for their idiotic actions.

Next time, let him die.
 
Idiot. Just another symptom of what is wrong in our country. No one takes any personal responsibility for their idiotic actions.

No joke. Hey look a flooded road!! Let's drive thru it and see what happens! If you're gonna be stupid you better be tough.
 
If he thought it was dangerous enough that they should have closed the road, why did he proceed to try to cross it? Might be the whole "hindsight is 20/20" scenario that made him realize that the road should have been closed, but in the moment, he didn't seem to think so.

You know, sometimes, bad things just happen. It's not anybody's fault, but the crap's gotta fall somewhere. I think not enough people chalk it up to that. Or try to capitalize on it. Not for financial gain necessarily, but as a scapegoat from their responsibilities (footing the bill for all his medical expenses. - maybe he should have opted to carry better insurance?).
 
If he thought it was dangerous enough that they should have closed the road, why did he proceed to try to cross it? Might be the whole "hindsight is 20/20" scenario that made him realize that the road should have been closed, but in the moment, he didn't seem to think so.

You know, sometimes, bad things just happen. It's not anybody's fault, but the crap's gotta fall somewhere. I think not enough people chalk it up to that. Or try to capitalize on it. Not for financial gain necessarily, but as a scapegoat from their responsibilities (footing the bill for all his medical expenses. - maybe he should have opted to carry better insurance?).


Comparative negligence. In our legal system we apportion negligence among all of the parties.

His perceptions are not relevant to a determination that the city was negligent in failing to close the road.

His perceptions are relevant to a determination that he was also negligent in driving down the road.
 
Wow, that's cold.

But it's accurate . If people are afraid to get sued, they might not help. It's the reason for the Good Samaritan act. That of course, does not protect first responders, emts or nurses.

I think this guy is disgustingly trying to profit with a settlement. A shameful little secret of healthcare,Is how crappy emts get paid. None of them are in it for the money. Now add in some lawsuits. I am amazed anyone takes that job at all.
 
Common sense is apparently not part of his gene make up. I have a friend who lives in the area that was severely flooded. She says it was horrible and on her way to work if the road looked bad, she went another direction. Her normally 45 minute commute to work took 3 1/2 hrs but she made it safely. Too bad this guy didn't use his brain and now wants to blame everyone else for his stupidity.

Sent from my iPhone using DISBoards
 
OK, I'll be the one who expresses the other point of view.

The man is suing because he has taken a hit of $540,000 and is unable to pay it himself. (Anyone know how far his insurance coverage goes?) In that type of situation, you tend to try to find someone else - usually someone with money, like, say, the government - to pony up. And the way to do that is by filing in court.

When you sue, you want to make sure you've got all the possibilities covered.
The road should have been closed, so sue the county.
The rescue was too slow, so sue the first responders.

Presumably the action against the first responders won't go anywhere, but suing someone for not closing the road just might.

You have to give Mr Ortiz some credit, though. At least he is not trying to sue God for putting that river in the wrong place, and for causing the flood.
 
But it's accurate . If people are afraid to get sued, they might not help. It's the reason for the Good Samaritan act. That of course, does not protect first responders, emts or nurses.

I think this guy is disgustingly trying to profit with a settlement. A shameful little secret of healthcare,Is how crappy emts get paid. None of them are in it for the money. Now add in some lawsuits. I am amazed anyone takes that job at all.

So you think first responders, who are either paid to do a job or who volunteer to do a job, should let someone die because they're afraid to be sued? :scared1: :scared1:
 
OK, I'll be the one who expresses the other point of view.

The man is suing because he has taken a hit of $540,000 and is unable to pay it himself. (Anyone know how far his insurance coverage goes?) In that type of situation, you tend to try to find someone else - usually someone with money, like, say, the government - to pony up. And the way to do that is by filing in court.

When you sue, you want to make sure you've got all the possibilities covered.
The road should have been closed, so sue the county.
The rescue was too slow, so sue the first responders.

Presumably the action against the first responders won't go anywhere, but suing someone for not closing the road just might.

You have to give Mr Ortiz some credit, though. At least he is not trying to sue God for putting that river in the wrong place, and for causing the flood.


Exactly. It would be legal malpractice if the lawyer didn't include the first responders.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!











facebook twitter
Top