So get your share of the pie while you can...

Does anyone remember the name of the lawsuit in the Heinlein book or story that had AIs suing each other on behalf of some sort of crazy trust or something?

I believe it was called the "something" baby dollar suit.

I think we should send the pork loin lady round to have a word with this fellow.

after of course he gets his head removed from his own ass.

Goddamn lawyers.

Yea but the mother is in a coma due to the accident. It is possible the kid was injured.

/just saying
//still hates lawyers

Before everyone gets their collective panties in a bunch, this is what summary judgment is for. They will have their case thrown out, they'll be charged with the costs, and if the judge feels that this was a frivolous suit, he'll sanction the attorney.

But feel free to get busy on the, "see, this is why we need new laws to limit poor people's right to bring suits" tirade.

Works for asbestos lawyers.

I vaguely remember the Baby Dollar thing...I believe it was mentioned in the Moon is a Harsh Mistress...but was originaly from another work.

Oh and this guy should eat a gun. He probably won't even get custody, the girl's family would likely have to care for the child.

Possibly injuries are not enough. You have to prove actual injuries. After the baby is born, you could go forward with it, imo.

IANAL, however.

Submitter has misled us. I think this guy has every right to protect the interests of his unborn child.

That man shouldn't be allowed to have children, much less file a lawsuit on behalf of one that ISN'T BORN YET.

I have a question, something that I honestly want to know, not necessarily flamebait.

Can an unborn child actually have it's own rights? I figured with the passing of Roe v. Wade, the rights of unborn children were basically nil.

/just asking
/Liberal, but doesn't believe in reckless abortion

Hate for lawyers is pointless, when it's normal people who hire them and start this BS. Blaming the messenger is pointless.

on behalf of teh child, what about your wife? you know the one laying in a medical bed with brain damage

rhtfa

mathmatix:

on behalf of teh child, what about your wife? you know the one laying in a medical bed with brain damage

rhtfa


Agnew isn't married to Renea Poppel, who is carrying the fetus, and his relationship with her parents is strained, Cogan said.

/also - even the submitter says it's his girlfriend, not wife, in the headline

And I'm 100% sure that if he wins any money, he'll put it all in a safe place for the child and not spend any of it.

what if the baby turns out not to be his?

Can an unborn child actually have it's own rights? I figured with the passing of Roe v. Wade, the rights of unborn children were basically nil.

I know you can definitely sue after the child is born, for injuries suffered in utero.

MDGeist: Of course you're right. I don't think anybody can expect respect on fark, which is fine. Taking lumps is healthy.

Snirtanion: Stop talking sense!!! This is Teh Fark!


/everybody hates lawyers until they need one
//married to one

not a dumbass. One of the reasons to file suit now, (even though a minor's statute of limitations is 2 years AFTER they reach 18) is that you can preserve evidence. i.e. interview witnesses, obtain photographs, technical data, etc, before memories fade, data is lost or destroyed, physical evidence is lost, destroyed or changed, etc. It seems premature to sue, since there is no way to tell if there will be any damage to the baby, but if they don't sue, and the evidence is lost, and there IS damage.... they might be out of luck. Covering all the bases I guess.

I think I'm going to sue Fark for my stupidity.

/ Every day I read Fark, I lose 3.14159265 IQ points.
// Go figure, it would have to be pi.

Mmmmmm... pi...

I wish I had 1/100 of this guy's chutzpah.

Lawyers are good for one thing...shark bait.

\\ loves to fish

frostbyt
Lawyers are good for one thing...shark bait.

How silly. That'll never work. Haven't you ever heard of professional courtesy?

It's not like the child may suffer because the mother was traumatized by reading about problems with a train. The mother was in a major crash and is in a coma with brain injuries.

Hate for lawyers is pointless, when it's normal people who hire them and start this BS. Blaming the messenger is pointless.

It's NOT pointless. A lawyer is supposed to be able to recognize a frivolous lawsuit. They make the choice to play the lottery.

There've been too many instances where they push to sue, then handle the action in such a way as to keep the fees coming. That's not acting in the best interests of their client.

ratbert: I wish I had 1/100 of this guy's chutzpah.

It's not chutzpah, it's good time management. By the time the case works its way through the appeals process, the kid will be born, and they'll be able to meaningfully determine whether it suffered any injuries. He's just cutting out the redundant waiting time.

Aurric: Can an unborn child actually have it's own rights? I figured with the passing of Roe v. Wade, the rights of unborn children were basically nil.

Goldfinger's got a point. If abortion is legal because an unborn baby isn't a human life, how far can injury claims on that unborn baby go? You can't have it both ways, ladies. Either it's a life or it isn't. I suppose it could be deemed property but then how much damage can you claim on say, if your cat was potentially injured by something?

/really has no opinion on abortion either way, so pro-choice by default

Aurric
Can an unborn child actually have it's own rights? I figured with the passing of Roe v. Wade, the rights of unborn children were basically nil.

The "viability" question after 20 weeks is an interesting one, both scientifically and philosophically. If we can keep the flames down on both sides, there are some interesting things to consider:

1) At what point can a baby reasonably live outside the womb?
2) At what point is it capable of newborn-level cognition?
3) Does either 1 or 2 affect its status as a "person" (and therefore provide it with rights and legal protection)?
4) What if it has a severe birth defect?

Like I said, interesting stuff. Personally, I'm pro-choice as a general rule, especially in the early weeks, but am very uncomfortable with the idea of a person deciding to abort a healthy baby after 20 weeks. However, many prenatal tests don't come back until that time, after which you have a whole other host of issues, from whether it's better to abort a fetus with a condition "incompatible with life" ASAP (rather than forcing the mother to go through prolonged heartbreak and risk) and, of course, the really contentious issue of Down's Syndrome and other survivable problems that affect quality of life to varying degrees, depending on severity and how the parents cope. (Considering also that, once born, they'll have full equal rights in civilized societies.)

These aren't easy questions to answer, but I've always thought that the extremism of both "all life starts at conception" and "nobody's business up to the day of birth" are preventing us from really working these things through. As a new parent, I recently had to seriously consider them all in theory, but was fortunate not to have been forced to make any really scary choices.

Personally, though, and a humanist, I don't think there's really any ultimately "right" answer. As with everything else, we just have to do the best we can with what we've got.

I'd be interested to hear reasonable, if conflicting, opinions on this.

NoHoJosh

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

Excellent.

I don't think an unborn child has rights, but like abortion, it's always up for argument as to when a fetus becomes a person.

I think this guy is an ass for filing a lawsuit when his girlfriend is still in a coma. Who cares if she dies, as long as he gets his cut for the baby?

I don't think an unborn child has rights, but like abortion, it's always up for argument as to when a fetus becomes a person.

I'm glad I had rights when I was a foetus.

I think this guy is an ass for filing a lawsuit when his girlfriend is still in a coma. Who cares if she dies, as long as he gets his cut for the baby?

Maybe he wants to be secure should she die and the child survive.

You're all being way too callous about this. This is a nightmare for him and a tragedy. I would do the same as would most others.

Abortion is legal, but you can sue for harming an unborn child?

Adman12: I'd be interested to hear reasonable, if conflicting, opinions on this.

I think your screen name indicates that you're in marketing and advertising so you need to kill yourself. I keed, I keed!

I just think they should be consistant. If they're saying that a fetus isn't a person then maybe they should find another way of classifying it so a proper dollar value can be assigned to its life.

Preemptive lawsuits. The new American Dream.

Let the kid file the damn lawsuit if he's injured! Oh sure, he's unborn and won't speak English for years - that's your excuse!

Goddamn foreigners. Go back to Wombsylvania or Coochiebekistan or whereever the hell you're from!

Legal to abort it, but harm it in any other way, and we'll see you in court.

/Still doesn't get it.
//I mean still, reeeaaallly, reaaalllly don't get it.
///Somebody 'splain please.

rogersnowden

Preemptive lawsuits. The new American Dream.

No shiat, man. No shiat. Knowing the American legal "system", it's prolly already been done.

/BTW.... DRTFA

Every dime this guy gets will be spent on hookers and blow; he doesn't give a shiat about this pseudo-baby. If he had any good sense, he'd save it for child support- he's gonna need it since he's not married to mommy.

BTW...remember Lacy's law, folks? It's considered 2 counts of murder if you kill a pregnant woman. Given that, this fark up could carry "fetal rights" over into other areas based on this law if his cards are played right and the judge buys into it (no pun intended). Not that I agree with that on any level, but it is possible and it's our government's fault.

cool_viv_p: what if the baby turns out not to be his?

Jerry! Jerry!

I'm thinking the baby is probably fine too, amniotic fluid is a really good shock absorber. I also don't know how far along she is.

2005-10-21 09:44:53 AM jack21221

Possibly injuries are not enough. You have to prove actual injuries. After the baby is born, you could go forward with it, imo.

IANAL, however.

No, but you could be, and I mean that in a nice way. At least, what you've described is pretty much the situation in Canada. Unborn children do not have the right to sue, nor parents to sue on their behalf. Subsequently born alive children DO have the right to sue (and parents to sue on their behalf). It also might be debatable whether, in the circumstances, a duty of care toward an unborn child existed that could give rise to a tort of negligence.

My opinion: in Canada, this guy's lawsuit wouldn't have a prayer unless (a) the child survives to term, which gets him over the procedural hump, and (b) when the child is born alive, he can prove that s/he was harmed by the accident. There's no point in bringing a lawsuit if neither of those are yet true.

Nick Nostril:

It's a corner case that many pro-abortion people wish didn't exist. It's like the rape situation for pro-lifers. If you argue your position even when faced with that situation, the other side can respond with indignation and call you an asshole.

Can I get legal rights for 'the twinkle in my eye' I have for my wife? :D

I don't know what for... but, can I?

I think I'd better go ahead and file too, you know, to protect my rights in case I was injured in the crash and don't know it yet.

Adman12

These aren't easy questions to answer, but I've always thought that the extremism of both "all life starts at conception" and "nobody's business up to the day of birth" are preventing us from really working these things through.

Yes. I would think that even the pro choicers would even agree that abortion becomes more wrong the farther into the pregnancy a woman is (or perhaps not).

And what you wrote may be the sanest most eloquent commentary I've heard on the abortion issue in a long time.

Given the campaign fliers I've received from the GOP in my state, you would think that abortion and gay marriage are the only issues that matter. And frankly I'm tired of politicians on both sides being judged strictly on these two issues.

I hurt my balls riding my bike the other day over a bumpy road here in Chicago. I don't know if my ability to creat sperm has been affected, but it MIGHT be. I'm going to sue the Department of Transportation!!!

Also, the store I went to was showing negligence by being located on a bumpy road. I'll sue those bastards, too!

And maybe the company that made my bike seat.

Wait...all this talk of litigation is making me look foolish. I'm suing myself for slander!!!

2005-10-21 10:12:34 AM honk

There've been too many instances where they push to sue, then handle the action in such a way as to keep the fees coming. That's not acting in the best interests of their client.

How many is "too many"? Too many for what? (My answers would be "one" and "for the reputation of the legal system", but I'm curious the aim of your rhetoric is.)

The bar associations I know would discipline the hell out of any lawyer that acted like that. So: if your "too many" means "a lot", then either a) there are some very ineffective bar assocations around (a fact which I find difficult to believe - it is in lawyers' best interests on the whole to whack the pee-pees of these miscreants, in order to keep their association liability and malpractice fees down and public confidence up) or b) you overstate the prevalence of these miscreants.

No, I do not have statistics to back this up.

If, on the other hand, your "too many" means "one, or just a few, but that's still too many", then I would agree, and I would add that it would be a shame if we were to judge our opinion of the legal profession based on the the actions of a few renegades.

1. He was planning to be married to the woman who is comatose right now. His relationship to her is not in question.

2. Her Parents do not get along with him. They filed suit on her behalf.

3. He is going to have to cover the costs for the baby, especially if it is injured. His lawyer probably advised to file now so that if there is a general settlement he can be covered in case the baby is injured.

starrion

4) If you try hard enough and do some digging, you cn justify almost ANY reason to sue.

" and we know there are lots of lawsuits being filed..."

Anyone else here want to find this guy and punch him in the cock?