IN - Grandfather charged in cruise ship death of toddler Chloe Wiegand #7

[Longtimenoc]

How often does a man drop a baby out of an open window? Has there been any cases in the past of anything remotely similar?

He thought there was glass. Ridiculous foolish words to deflect blame. He is a very weak man unable to admit that he is entirely to blame. He is evidently being propped up by greed.

 

[Kindred]

Looks like this case is going the distance. Judge did not accept RCL motion to dismiss:
Parents of toddler who died on cruise ship can proceed in suit

Gabbing the docs on this now! Will post in a bit

 

[Kindred]

NEW DOCS

Ok three docs got filed last night.

COURT ORDER RULING ON DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS, PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO STRIKE VIDEO/FOR EXTENSION TO FILE RESPONSE/MOTION TO FILE PRELIMINARY RESPONSE
Filed 2/5/20

Court Order 2-6-20.pdf

6 pages. Everything is denied.


PLAINTIFFS’NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
Filed 2/5/20 after the Court Order came out
2 seperate documents to it

Notice of Supplemental Authority.pdf

This one I can actually post the entirety right here. It's the following paragraph:

"The Plaintiffs, ALAN WIEGAND, et al., by and through undersigned counsel, hereby providethis Honorable Courtthe following supplemental authority concerningDefendant, ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES LTD.’S Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint [D.E. 7]and Plaintiffs’response in opposition [D.E. 18]–Orderdenying the cruise line’s Motion to Dismiss in the case of Marabella v. NCL (Bahamas), Ltd., 19-CV-25185, 2020 WL 533987 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 3, 2020)(attached as Exhibit 1)."

Plaintiff Filing Marabella v NCL.pdf

6 page photocopy of a ruling from Marabella v Norwegian Cruise Lines

 

[Lawnguylander1964]

On the judge's ruling, is he saying that RCCL is denied on a technicality because they didnt officially incorporate the video by reference?

If so. Sheesh!

But we now get discovery, so there's that.

 

[Lawnguylander1964]

Marbella v NCL = Duty to warn about wind on a cruise ship.

I really need to take a cruise and file a law suit.

 

[al66pine]

Selecting an Atty for Probate. Oogie Talk?

The Chicago attorney could be a member of the bar in both Indiana and Illinois. I worked for lawyers in DC and almost all of them were members of bars in other states and waived into DC and then when they got older, they took the Florida bar as they headed toward retirement ;o) My cousin is a member of both bars in NJ and NY.

@Lawnguylander1964 Yes, appears Polansky is licensed in two states, IL and IN.*
Your post commented about two possible factors in selecting an atty w Chicago ofc:
---- hiring non-local atty, someone they would not randomly encounter in South Bend. Agreeing w you on that - unplanned encounters w Polansky in South Bend seem unlikely.
--- Maybe 'oogie' for them to talk about "very personal things" w someone they knew.

Given the circumstances, a probate proceeding like this is undoubtedly excruciatingly painful for the parents. But imo not a situation in which AW & SJW have reason to divulge deep, dark secrets to counsel, whether he is a stranger or best buds w them. Procedure for being appt'ed as pers reps is rather straightforward, esp'ly if uncontested, as this was. It's possible AW & KSW did not meet w him in person for the probate matter, except in IN court. Or possible that they or one of them already knew Polansky personally or professionally. IDK.

@JerseySleuth17 Thanks for your post re oogie. I learn something every day on this site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Per Martindale Hubbell, linked in my earlier post, Polansky is member of IL bar.
Per Indiana Bar website, updated July 2019, he is a non-resident member of IN bar.
Mr. Ian Peter Polansky - Indiana State Bar Association
** 96 miles · Light traffic · 1 hr 52 min. South Bend, IN→Chicago, IL.
driving distance South Bend IN to Chicago IL - Bing

 

[In vino veritas]

On the judge's ruling, is he saying that RCCL is denied on a technicality because they didnt officially incorporate the video by reference?

If so. Sheesh!

But we now get discovery, so there's that.

Yes there is that. And hopefully the discovery that RCL puts forth is conclusive and irrefutable. Because, at this point, I really, really loathe the idea of this family gaining any financial benefit from Chloe’s death.

Can the case still be dismissed by the judge if the discovery supports RCL?

 

[LietKynes]

Yes there is that. And hopefully the discovery that RCL puts forth is conclusive and irrefutable. Because, at this point, I really, really loathe the idea of this family gaining any financial benefit from Chloe’s death.

Can the case still be dismissed by the judge if the discovery supports RCL?

Agreed.
Sad when a family treats the death of a child (that they know is no one's fault except the one who dangled her out of a window, that he knew was open ) like it's a big lotto win.
Disgusting and greedy.

 

[Barnabas]

If they win a load of money in such an obvious case of it being Grampa fault there will be more tragedies like this on cruise ships and everywhere else. Can’t pay your bills? Toss a kid out the window and start the money rolling in.

 

[In vino veritas]

Agreed.
Sad when a family treats the death of a child (that they know is no one's fault except the one who dangled her out of a window, that he knew was open ) like it's a big lotto win.
Disgusting and greedy.

Oh no... according to KW( driving force behind all this, IMO), the sole purpose of the lawsuit is to improve ship safety so this doesn’t happen to another family. HOGWASH, IMO!!

MW isn’t going to take on a case like this out of the goodness of his heart. And it’s doubtful the Wiegands have the funds to pay MW in a protracted lawsuit if there is no monetary reward sought.

This lawsuit is about money, and that is all. I find the behavior of the Wiegands utterly deplorable. But , as they’ve demonstrated time and again, they don’t care about public sentiment. They have their eyes on the prize.

 

[neesaki]

If they win a load of money in such an obvious case of it being Grampa fault there will be more tragedies like this on cruise ships and everywhere else. Can’t pay your bills? Toss a kid out the window and start the money rolling in.

Just think of all the "Ross Harris' "that will start taking cruises. SMH

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Oh no... according to KW( driving force behind all this, IMO), the sole purpose of the lawsuit is to improve ship safety so this doesn’t happen to another family. HOGWASH, IMO!!

MW isn’t going to take on a case like this out of the goodness of his heart. And it’s doubtful the Wiegands have the funds to pay MW in a protracted lawsuit if there is no monetary reward sought.

This lawsuit is about money, and that is all. I find the behavior of the Wiegands utterly deplorable. But , as they’ve demonstrated time and again, they don’t care about public sentiment. They have their eyes on the prize.

Evidently, Chloe wasn't a prize. The Weigands don't seem to care that they lost their little girl.

 

[Medstudies]

Just think of all the "Ross Harris' "that will start taking cruises. SMH

Right?! I won’t be surprised for another and I’m sure they’re making their to-do list
Something like,

For future reference:

• Do not sext someone else (particularly an underage someone else) the same day
• Schedule an optometrist visit prior to sailing, and be sure to miss a couple on the ishihara test. (Perfect excuse “have trouble with windows” )
• Do a photo op at a local ice rink, banging on the glass. “Coz. Fun. And stuff”
• Oh and, Be sure to have a dab of shampoo On fingertips while being interviewed, (rub eyes - Get the tears flowing.)

 

[Medstudies]

If they win a load of money in such an obvious case of it being Grampa fault there will be more tragedies like this on cruise ships and everywhere else. Can’t pay your bills? Toss a kid out the window and start the money rolling in.

Yep, it sure could pay more than slip and falls... And heck there’s sympathy without a scratch.

Looks like Chloe is just an end to the means. - “easy” money$$$$

 

[Montrealaise]

Evidently, Chloe wasn't a prize. The Weigands don't seem to care that they lost their little girl.

That poor little child has now become the Wiegand's cash cow. Disgusting.

 

[Lawsmygame2]

Yes there is that. And hopefully the discovery that RCL puts forth is conclusive and irrefutable. Because, at this point, I really, really loathe the idea of this family gaining any financial benefit from Chloe’s death.

Can the case still be dismissed by the judge if the discovery supports RCL?

RCCL may re-file their motion to dismiss limiting their arguments to complainant’s complaint (no fluff...just addressing the issues set out in Wiegand’s complaint).

Court Order 2-6-20.pdf

 

[SaguaroSpirit]

Evidently, Chloe wasn't a prize. The Weigands don't seem to care that they lost their little girl.

 

[mheido67]

RCCL may re-file their motion to dismiss limiting their arguments to complainant’s complaint (no fluff...just addressing the issues set out in Wiegand’s complaint).

Court Order 2-6-20.pdf

It seems the judge did leave that as an option for RCCL but didn’t he also rule that the plaintiffs had shown sufficient cause to move forward with the process?

 

[wildblue]

Everything about the civil suit disgusts me. I don’t believe for an instant that it has anything to do with changing a ship’s flaws (which I don’t think is a truth anyway) but just a blatant money grab. Step Grandpa should end this mess by admitting his 100% fault and to try to make amends for his wrongdoing.

I also don’t see how color blindness is a get out of jail free card. He wears glasses and has likely, in his 51 years, had multiple color blindness tests. If he knew prior, his liability would be the same as if I, who needs contacts to see, went driving without them and caused a fatal accident. If you have a known disability, you would need to be prudent and make decisions accordingly. I know that optometrists, specifically on the PR program, have said that color blindness does not cause a person to not see a opening at a window, but even if it did, it would be SA’s responsibility when near windows or glass panes to do his due diligence in making sure he knows what is there or not and to not swing a toddler around and sit her in a manner where, if he was wrong, could imperil the child.

jmo

 

[al66pine]

Mr. Jaques' Affidavit. Anything Else?
Aside from Jaques' 4 page affidavit now tacked on to the 101 page pictorial extravaganza Report dated Jan. 10, did any motions or filings contain more info re Jaques? Anything vaguely resembling a resume or CV? A list of his publications or cases in which he testified? Disclosure re compensation?
Too early for any discovery deadlines, as court just (essentially)overruled RCL's Motion to Dismiss. Is Jaques' stmt & affidavit a publicity move for a media-conference, a prop for Winkleman?

Interesting reading. Pax claimed to have tripped over a cleaning bucket in buffet line. From Dec 2018 law firm blog, about then-pending (and still-pending, IIRC) lawsuit against Costa/Carnival:
"According to court records, Mr. Jaques’s report, which detailed his personal background, did not include a copy of his resume or Curriculum Vitae (CV), a list of his publications, the cases in which he testified as an expert, or his compensation.
"Costa moved to strike the report and prevent him from giving any testimony in the case. Costa claimed that his report did not comply with the strict technical requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Mr. Jaques then supplemented his report to include those items...." bbm
The Battle of Expert Witnesses in Cruise Ship Accident Claims - Aronfeld.com
Thanks a million to @Lawnguylander1964 for post & link. ^