The Sandy Hook lawsuits begin

posted at 2:01 pm on December 30, 2012 by Jazz Shaw

While sad, I’ve no doubt that this was entirely predictable. In the wake of the shooting tragedy in Newtown, the first of the lawsuits has been filed and the plaintiffs are seeking a substantial payday.

A $100 million claim on behalf of a 6-year-old survivor is the first legal action to come out of the Connecticut school shooting that left 26 children and adults dead two weeks ago.

The unidentified client, referred to as Jill Doe, heard “cursing, screaming, and shooting” over the school intercom when the gunman, 20-year-old Adam Lanza, opened fire, according to the claim filed by New Haven-based attorney Irv Pinsky.

“As a consequence, the … child has sustained emotional and psychological trauma and injury, the nature and extent of which are yet to be determined,” the claim said.

There is no doubt that the survivors of the attack and their loved ones experienced an unimaginably traumatic event which will stay with them forever. But what is the basis for the claim, not in terms of damages, but the fault of those being sued?

Pinsky’s claim said that the state Board of Education, Department of Education and Education Commissioner had failed to take appropriate steps to protect children from “foreseeable harm.”

It said they had failed to provide a “safe school setting” or design “an effective student safety emergency response plan and protocol.”

Before you can go and ask for $100M from the school board and the state, I think you need to demonstrate that they either did something wrong or failed to do something which would have substantially affected the outcome. This seems to be the same line of thinking that Doug Mataconis is taking on the subject. Let’s turn it over to an actual lawyer for a moment.

At the time Adam Lanza showed up at the school that day, the doors were locked an visitors could only be let in by someone in authority in the school office. When the incident started, teachers and aides did everything they could to evacuate the building or get the children into areas where they’d be hidden and safe. One teacher lost her life protecting her children from Lanza’s murderous spree. What, exactly, is it that this family asserts the school could have reasonably done differently? Perhaps they need to count their blessings, be glad their child is safe, and stop looking for a pot of gold out of this horrible tragedy.

That last sentence is the real kicker here. Your child is alive. There are twenty families in your neighborhood who can’t say the same. You might think to count yourself one of the luckiest people in the world by comparison. You also live in a state which already has some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the nation. The school had just finished another security review, implementing additional safety features and protocols. And as Doug notes, the building was in lock down.

Where is the negligence? Where is the justification for holding your hand out now and demanding to win the lottery while everyone around you is mourning? This is a sad, sad state of affairs.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

….figures!

KOOLAID2 on December 30, 2012 at 2:03 PM

At the time Adam Lanza showed up at the school that day, the doors were locked an visitors could only be let in by someone in authority in the school office. When the incident started, teachers and aides did everything they could to evacuate the building or get the children into areas where they’d be hidden and safe. One teacher lost her life protecting her children from Lanza’s murderous spree. What, exactly, is it that this family asserts the school could have reasonably done differently? Perhaps they need to count their blessings, be glad their child is safe, and stop looking for a pot of gold out of this horrible tragedy

…lawyers!

KOOLAID2 on December 30, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Where is the negligence? Where is the justification for holding your hand out now and demanding to win the lottery while everyone around you is mourning? This is a sad, sad state of affairs

…oh oh!…tort reform?

KOOLAID2 on December 30, 2012 at 2:05 PM

That last sentence is the real kicker here. Your child is alive. There are twenty families in your neighborhood who can’t say the same. You might think to count yourself one of the luckiest people in the world by comparison. You also live in a state which already has some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the nation. The school had just finished another security review, implementing additional safety features and protocols. And as Doug notes, the building was in lock down

…they are all probably liberals…someone is responsible!

KOOLAID2 on December 30, 2012 at 2:06 PM

Because emotions are money.

Speakup on December 30, 2012 at 2:06 PM

Your child is alive. There are twenty families in your neighborhood who can’t say the same. You might think to count yourself one of the luckiest people in the world by comparison.

Amen.

Tim_CA on December 30, 2012 at 2:06 PM

It’s doubtful that this suit will be accepted by a judge, because of sovereign immunity.

Steven Den Beste on December 30, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Disgusting.

Lizzy on December 30, 2012 at 2:08 PM

You can’t get blood from a stone but lawyers can get loads of cash from a corpse.

Dan_Yul on December 30, 2012 at 2:09 PM

This is the USA now, but I’ll FIFY:

1) Loser pays (lawsuits)
2) Term limits
3) No earmarks

Right2bright?

yubley on December 30, 2012 at 2:11 PM

This is a sad, sad state of affairs.

And as you said, entirely predictable.

HotAirian on December 30, 2012 at 2:12 PM

And you wonder why Republicans are stereotyped as heartless.
 
lostmotherland on October 17, 2012 at 11:37 AM

rogerb on December 30, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Remember how everyone had sympathy for the 9/11 families until they started whining about money. Talk about greedy… The parents are using a national tragedy to get a huge payday.

Illinidiva on December 30, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Tort,

Reform.

It isn’t enough that these lawsuits be thrown out. They lawyers, after all, are not really even expecting 1/2 of 1% of 100M.

Filing lawsuits like this must be punishable. Paying the legal costs of the other side is a good start. Leaving aside the fact that you’re using the brute force of law to extort money from a settlement, there are only so many judges and scum like this waste the court’s time and taxpayer money.

HitNRun on December 30, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Obama started feeding on carrion, like vultures, one hour after the deaths of the kids. He has been munching ever since.

The lawyers and the parents don’t have any decency either.

Obama killed the last shred of decency in AmeriKa.

Schadenfreude on December 30, 2012 at 2:14 PM

OT…for now

Schadenfreude on December 30, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Irv Pinsky sounds like he comes from that fine stock of upstanding attorneys affectionately known among their equally upstanding peers as “ambulance chasers”.

pilamaye on December 30, 2012 at 2:15 PM

I’m surprised it took this long.

They don’t want guns in schools but yet are mad when there isn’t a plan in place to take down a madman nutbar?

Do they not see the hypocrisy here?

gophergirl on December 30, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Whatever happened to the lawsuits from the Aurora shooting. Nothing as same with this. No paid interview for the survivors that just got mental damage and not shot.

tjexcite on December 30, 2012 at 2:20 PM

OT…for now

Schadenfreude on December 30, 2012 at 2:15 PM

….there’s hope!

KOOLAID2 on December 30, 2012 at 2:23 PM

I predict that gun-free zones are going to be wiped out by lawsuits, which regardless of how you feel about lawsuits is a preferable outcome to lives of children being wiped out by gun-free zones and the hippies responsible.

FloatingRock on December 30, 2012 at 2:24 PM

I’m not going to target this family and insinuate they are a bunch of gold diggers, not going to do it. We are forced to send our kids to these public schools, we are all forced to pay taxes to these schools so we would expect the children to be as safe as possible. Every fat cat politician and large private enterprise has armed guards protecting people in their buildings so why not schools? These lawsuits could head somewhere constructive by pointing out the futility of these “gun free zones” and forcing change.

Daemonocracy on December 30, 2012 at 2:25 PM

When there are dead bodies, the ghouls will come out. Every time.

apostic on December 30, 2012 at 2:27 PM

Next…
Obama to come out and say that the Connecticut Board of Education acted stupidly..

Electrongod on December 30, 2012 at 2:28 PM

The kettle of vultures gets bigger. While armed security could have lessened the number lost, or maybe stopped the attack at the outset, the school did take reasonable and lawful precautions to protect the children.

Liam on December 30, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Can we sue these morons for being insensitive greedy jackwagons?

Snake307 on December 30, 2012 at 2:29 PM

its an Occupy lawyer.
need I say more?

dmacleo on December 30, 2012 at 2:30 PM

On Sunday, 2 days after the CT shooting, a man went to a restaurant in San Antonio to kill his X-girlfriend. After he shot her, most of the people in the restaurant fled next door to a theater. The gunman followed them and entered the theater so he could shoot more people. He started shooting and people in the theater started running and screaming. It’s like the Aurora, CO theater story plus a restaurant! Now aren’t you wondering why this isn’t a lead story in the national media along with the school shooting? There was an off duty county deputy at the theater. SHE pulled out her gun and shot the man 4 times before he had a chance to kill anyone. So since this story makes the point that the best thing to stop a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun, the media is treating it like it never happened.

Only the local media covered it. The city is giving her a medal next week.

Schadenfreude on December 30, 2012 at 2:33 PM

Do they not see the hypocrisy here?

gophergirl on December 30, 2012 at 2:20 PM

…I have a feeling the majority of them voted for JugEars…so, knowing their political proclivity…uh…NO!

KOOLAID2 on December 30, 2012 at 2:33 PM

There needs to be a heavy-duty downside for bringing frivolous, unethical lawsuits like this.

Tom C on December 30, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Well this suit sounds like a major way to get all schools to have retired military/retired cops/cops/teachers with guns/posses as Joe A is doing in AZ at all schools?

The lawyer here is making the case for guns in schools to protect the kids!
L

letget on December 30, 2012 at 2:37 PM

On Sunday, 2 days after the CT shooting, a man went to a restaurant in San Antonio to kill his X-girlfriend. After he shot her, most of the people in the restaurant fled next door to a theater. The gunman followed them and entered the theater so he could shoot more people. He started shooting and people in the theater started running and screaming. It’s like the Aurora, CO theater story plus a restaurant! Now aren’t you wondering why this isn’t a lead story in the national media along with the school shooting? There was an off duty county deputy at the theater. SHE pulled out her gun and shot the man 4 times before he had a chance to kill anyone. So since this story makes the point that the best thing to stop a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun, the media is treating it like it never happened.

Only the local media covered it. The city is giving her a medal next week.

Schadenfreude on December 30, 2012 at 2:33 PM

…first I’ve heard about it!
…get me a bib!…I’m reacting to it like some kind of TROLL!…I have spittle coming out of the right side of my mouth… right now!

KOOLAID2 on December 30, 2012 at 2:38 PM

I predict that gun-free zones are going to be wiped out by lawsuits, which regardless of how you feel about lawsuits is a preferable outcome to lives of children being wiped out by gun-free zones and the hippies responsible.

FloatingRock on December 30, 2012 at 2:24 PM

…lawd help me!…I’m patting you on the back for optimistically thinking that!

KOOLAID2 on December 30, 2012 at 2:40 PM

I predict that gun-free zones are going to be wiped out by lawsuits, which regardless of how you feel about lawsuits is a preferable outcome to lives of children being wiped out by gun-free zones and the hippies responsible.

FloatingRock on December 30, 2012 at 2:24 PM

I agree 100%. This lawsuit doesn’t bother me. I don’t think it will see the light of day in a courtroom, but the fact of the matter is everything wasn’t done to make sure these kids could be properly defended in the case of an attack. We put armed air marshals on airplanes as a response to 9/11. I don’t recall hearing that airplanes would be gun-free zones just because kids might be flying in them.

joejm65 on December 30, 2012 at 2:41 PM

they are all probably liberals…someone is responsible!

KOOLAID2 on December 30, 2012 at 2:06 PM

yepper

cmsinaz on December 30, 2012 at 2:41 PM

And as Doug notes, the building was in lock down.

Apparently not! And do they always allow people dressed in Camo to enter unchallenged?

And they did not do everything possible to prevent this…they declared the school a “gun free” zone…Hello?

Twana on December 30, 2012 at 2:41 PM

letget on December 30, 2012 at 2:37 PM

and yepper

cmsinaz on December 30, 2012 at 2:41 PM

The Entitlement State, in full bloom!

Another Drew on December 30, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Perhaps they need to count their blessings, be glad their child is safe, and stop looking for a pot of gold out of this horrible tragedy.

It’s just absolutely disgusting that anyone would even consider a lawsuit like this. Something tells me that a lawyer made the first move here.

About the only people lower than that are the one’s who falsely claimed to be a parent or friend of one of the kids who were murdered to scam donations for themselves.

JetBoy on December 30, 2012 at 2:44 PM

The vultures circle. Wanna bet the attorney voted for the One.

CW on December 30, 2012 at 2:47 PM

It’s just absolutely disgusting that anyone would even consider a lawsuit like this. Something tells me that a lawyer made the first move here.

About the only people lower than that are the one’s who falsely claimed to be a parent or friend of one of the kids who were murdered to scam donations for themselves.

JetBoy on December 30, 2012 at 2:44 PM

…yeah!…BUT THEY’RE IN JAIL !

KOOLAID2 on December 30, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Schadenfreude on December 30, 2012 at 2:33 PM

lol…great stories like this never stand a chance.

A psychotic, wetbrain who steals mommy’s fire-arm (cuz the state turned HIM down) and shoots up a school, however…

Year-Long Media Gold!

Turn on the milking machine!

Tim_CA on December 30, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Jill Doe, heard “cursing, screaming, and shooting” over the school intercom when the gunman, 20-year-old Adam Lanza, opened fire

I understood that the intercom alerted people down the hall as to what was happening. Teachers were able to prepare BEFORE the shooter got to the classrooms. I read that the music teacher had her kids locked in a classroom and likely saved those kids lives.

That intercom may have saved lives.

LilyBart on December 30, 2012 at 2:58 PM

Who do I sue for not creating a 100% safe environment protecting me from hearing about creeps like Pinsky?

Christien on December 30, 2012 at 3:03 PM

Where is the negligence? Where is the justification for holding your hand out now and demanding to win the lottery while everyone around you is mourning? This is a sad, sad state of affairs.

I have mixed feelings on this. After Columbine and Virginia Tech, should not every school have a real security plan? (and I don’t mean merely putting up signs that read “Target Rich Environment.” )

Look, these various places MUST perform a real security audit and have a plan. Banks have armed guards.

Aren’t children more valuable than money? Just asking. The left wasted no time using these events to further their push to disarm us.

dogsoldier on December 30, 2012 at 3:04 PM

A $100 million claim on behalf of a 6-year-old survivor is the first legal action to come out of the Connecticut school shooting

“As a consequence, the … child has sustained emotional and psychological trauma and injury, the nature and extent of which are yet to be determined,” the claim said.

Ok, so three weeks out from the disaster, one uninjured, surviving “victim” (hence, really just a bystander), by proxy of her parents, is filing a nine-figure lawsuit, citing effects from the incident that by their own confessions are “unknown” in breadth and scope at this time and claiming that the schoolboard did not do enough to prevent the “foreseeable harm” of the event, the effects of which could only have possibly been averted by some magical disapparation or Draconian ban of all firearms (which the schoolboard has no lawful or even physical means to do) or to post an armed guard at the school or allow some teachers to carry weapons, the idea of either of the latter being openly mocked in the media and wouldn’t have necessarily stopped the attack but only served to lessen the bodycount.

Now that’s perfectly executed political analysis (in the form of an über-run-on sentence.)

Glenn Jericho on December 30, 2012 at 3:07 PM

dogsoldier on December 30, 2012 at 3:04 PM

How many liberals, though, would fight some kind of plan for drills to save children during a violent attack? Their first excuse would be it’ll scare the kids, the same way some media types ‘learned from experts’ that guns in schools create a hostile learning environment. Of course, there is such a thing as plainclothes police but the Left doesn’t think beyond sound bites and the smallest of ideas.

Liam on December 30, 2012 at 3:12 PM

The liberals/progressives have produced about three generations of idiots. As long as they are around, things like this will continue to happen.

savage24 on December 30, 2012 at 3:12 PM

This is Obama’s America. You don’t have to be right to win a lawsuit, you just have to bring the lawsuit and threats of more. Right and wrong is for Republicans.

HopeHeFails on December 30, 2012 at 3:21 PM

And you wonder why Republicans are stereotyped as heartless.

lostmotherland on October 17, 2012 at 11:37 AM

But, I do not wonder why liberal a-holes like you are stereotyped as brainless.

bw222 on December 30, 2012 at 3:26 PM

Who cares about dead kids in Sandy Hook anyway? They have nothing to do with me. They weren’t my kids.

HotAirLib

xblade on December 30, 2012 at 3:26 PM

Irv Pinsky sounds like he comes from that fine stock of upstanding attorneys affectionately known among their equally upstanding peers as “ambulance chasers”.

pilamaye on December 30, 2012 at 2:15 PM

In the Detroit area a ambulance chasing family of scumbags makes enough that they are the Tigers primary TV sponsors.

bw222 on December 30, 2012 at 3:31 PM

I would argue that there are many schools in the Nation that have ARMED guards, and have not experienced the horrors of Sandy Hook.
Use the Friends School in DC as an example.
Gun Free Zones are an invitation to a shooting gallery for the insane.

dirtengineer on December 30, 2012 at 3:33 PM

This is the left wing and it is Connecticut

Delsa on December 30, 2012 at 3:36 PM

bw222 on December 30, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Out here we’ve got one that puts maimed clients on TV telling us how much money he…. “got them”.

Tim_CA on December 30, 2012 at 3:38 PM

Greedy people. There are no grounds for a lawsuit since no way could the state or school be considered negligent wrt an unknown psychopathic killer who gave no warnings. Looks like they hope their lawyers will successfully get a stupid jury easy to get all teary eyed. Anything for money for some people.

Chessplayer on December 30, 2012 at 3:44 PM

Where is the negligence? Where is the justification for holding your hand out now and demanding to win the lottery while everyone around you is mourning? This is a sad, sad state of affairs.

I’ll tell you where the negligence lies – the creation of supposedly “gun-free” kill zones is the most negligent act I’ve ever heard of. Prohibiting law abiding citizens from exercising their rights and responsibility to protect themselves and others from the criminally insane, IS NEGLIGENT. What the hell do you not understand about that, Jazz?

Harbingeing on December 30, 2012 at 3:48 PM

Out here we’ve got one that puts maimed clients on TV telling us how much money he…. “got them”.

Tim_CA on December 30, 2012 at 3:38 PM

It’s the same tactic Sam Bernstein uses on his Tigers games commercials.

bw222 on December 30, 2012 at 4:03 PM

We are forced to send our kids to these public schools,

Daemonocracy on December 30, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Private schools, parochial schools, charter schools, home schooling?

talkingpoints on December 30, 2012 at 4:06 PM

Where is the negligence? Where is the justification for holding your hand out now and demanding to win the lottery while everyone around you is mourning? This is a sad, sad state of affairs.

From the reporting (which has been all over the place) it sounds as if the school was better prepared than many to deal with this almost but not completely unimaginable situation. The school was in lockdown, the teachers herded their classes into bathrooms or against the walls after locking classroom doors.

The parents of “Jill Doe” are greedy ghouls. Lawsuits were inevitable but I always figured the first would be from one or more parent who lost their child or the family of one of the staff members killed. I never figured it would be some selfish family looking for a payout for mental “pain and suffering” when so many around them are experiencing the real thing. I’ll say it again- greedy ghouls.

Happy Nomad on December 30, 2012 at 4:12 PM

How many liberals, though, would fight some kind of plan for drills to save children during a violent attack? Their first excuse would be it’ll scare the kids, the same way some media types ‘learned from experts’ that guns in schools create a hostile learning environment. Of course, there is such a thing as plainclothes police but the Left doesn’t think beyond sound bites and the smallest of ideas.

Liam on December 30, 2012 at 3:12 PM

You’re probably right and it would be the same sanctimonious knuckleheads that demanded the states release all the loons.

Back in the day, we practiced “duck and cover” to no ill effect. We all knew what that was about.

Don’t they perform fire drills anymore?

dogsoldier on December 30, 2012 at 4:15 PM

I’ll tell you where the negligence lies – the creation of supposedly “gun-free” kill zones is the most negligent act I’ve ever heard of. Prohibiting law abiding citizens from exercising their rights and responsibility to protect themselves and others from the criminally insane, IS NEGLIGENT. What the hell do you not understand about that, Jazz?

Harbingeing on December 30, 2012 at 3:48 PM

I agree completely but no lawsuit in a liberal place like CT is going to become a discussion of gun-free zones and the Second Amendment. This is all about liability. 27 people lost their lives and the ambulance chasers, apparently, have begun recruiting victims from among those marginially involved. By the time it is all over the school system, the manufacturer of the weapons used, the estate of the shooter’s mom, and anybody else they think have deep pockets will be named in one or more lawsuit.

Happy Nomad on December 30, 2012 at 4:16 PM

Cloward-Piven.

Kenosha Kid on December 30, 2012 at 4:17 PM

Don’t they perform fire drills anymore?

dogsoldier on December 30, 2012 at 4:15 PM

Fire drills were fun, since we got out of class for a little while.

Liberals have decided the only ‘solution’ is restricting legal gun possession, and so will never entertain anything else. They have no creative ideas and mock everything except what they have doggedly decided as their goal. More gun free zones, fewer legal guns, etc. They make fun of arming every teacher, when that doesn’t have to be. Why not two armed police in schools, and teachers are trained to use and carry tasers?

There are ways to make schools more safe in ways that are more workable than what liberals demand, but but they won’t even entertain the ideas. It’s simply, “No, we’re against that,” and that’s as far as they’ll allow.

Liam on December 30, 2012 at 4:29 PM

It’s doubtful that this suit will be accepted by a judge, because of sovereign immunity.

Steven Den Beste on December 30, 2012 at 2:07 PM

No lawsuit was filed.

A claim was filed with the Connecticut state Claims Commissioner.

The General Assembly or the commissioner can authorize a claimant to sue the state when they deem it just and equitable and when the claim, in their opinion, presents an issue of law or fact under which the state, were it a private person, could be liable. The state waives its immunity from liability and all defenses that might arise from the governmental nature of the activity complained of. The rights and liability of the state in these lawsuits are the same as those of private persons in similar circumstances. The lawsuit must be filed within one year after it was authorized and must be tried to the court without a jury (CGS §§ 4-159, 160).

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/rpt/2011-R-0076.htm

While Connecticut has a procedure for waiving sovereign immunity, there will be no runaway jury.

slp on December 30, 2012 at 4:32 PM

While Connecticut has a procedure for waiving sovereign immunity, there will be no runaway jury.

slp on December 30, 2012 at 4:32 PM

Here’s the part of your post that most struck me (from the CT law)

The lawsuit must be filed within one year after it was authorized and must be tried to the court without a jury (CGS §§ 4-159, 160).

And yet these “parents” rushed to file two weeks after the atrocity, while the investigation is ongoing, and ahead of any lawsuit by one families who lost a loved one. Throw in the fact that these two weeks also included the holidays where there was more than a couple of empty Christmas mornings by those who lost a tiny child and you’ve really got to be appalled at the speed in which “Jill Doe’s” parents sued. They had a year- why so quickly. They truly are greedy ghouls.

Happy Nomad on December 30, 2012 at 4:43 PM

slp on December 30, 2012 at 4:32 PM

BTW, were I the parent of a six-year old whose only direct involvement in the shooting was hearing cursing and screaming over the intercom I’d still be holding them too tight to file a lawsuit. They got to pick up “Jill Doe” at the firehouse. Twenty other families were not able to do so and yet they were the first lawsuit. Greedy selfish ghouls.

Happy Nomad on December 30, 2012 at 4:47 PM

By the time it is all over the school system, the manufacturer of the weapons used, the estate of the shooter’s mom, and anybody else they think have deep pockets will be named in one or more lawsuit.

Happy Nomad on December 30, 2012 at 4:16 PM

It’s times like this I wish I had become a lawyer. I’d file a lawsuit, specifically on 2nd amendment grounds to make such supposedly “gun-free zones” illegal and unconstitutional. There is no justification anywhere, to restrict law-abiding citizens from exercising their constitutional right to “keep and bear arms”, especially in regards to their fundamental right to defending their own life and liberty, let alone the life and liberty of others. I have no problem with any lawyer or plaintiff who “hits the lottery” by suing “gun-free zones” completely out of existence. That lawyer would become my hero, as a matter of fact.

Harbingeing on December 30, 2012 at 4:51 PM

“Jill Doe’s” parents “The DillDoes”sued. They had a year- why so quickly. They truly are greedy ghouls.

Happy Nomad on December 30, 2012 at 4:43 PM

cableguy615 on December 30, 2012 at 5:07 PM

I have no problem with any lawyer or plaintiff who “hits the lottery” by suing “gun-free zones” completely out of existence. That lawyer would become my hero, as a matter of fact.

Harbingeing on December 30, 2012 at 4:51 PM

I agree but I would suggest such a lawsuit is never going to be successful when attached to emotionally traumatic incidents like Sandy Hook. And once the emotions return to normal, the chances of getting liberals to go along with the idea of eliminating “gun-free zones” at schools is gone.

Liberals are happy to stand on twenty tiny caskets and declare the need for change. But that never EVER includes upholding the Second Amendment. They like the blood of children for only one reason- they think they can get the guns because of it. They are as ghoulish as the awful greedy “parents” who filed the first lawsuit.

And BTW, I passionately mean every word of the above comments. Liberals don’t give a damn about dead children beyond what they can “do with it” to ban guns. I am quite sure Obama and the Brady Group were high-fiving each other when the death toll of children reached 20.

Happy Nomad on December 30, 2012 at 5:09 PM

Pinsky’s claim said that the state Board of Education, Department of Education and Education Commissioner had failed to take appropriate steps to protect children from “foreseeable harm.”

Post armed guards at all schools and/or arm school personnel. Any moron should understand that this would solve the problem.

“I am skeptical that the only answer is putting more guns in schools. And I think the vast majority of the American people are skeptical that that somehow is going to solve our problem,” -Obooba.

Never mind.

Akzed on December 30, 2012 at 5:09 PM

Disgusting. Obviously, these people are obama supporters, and, just like obama, they view the Sandy Hook tragedy as a convenient “crisis” to exploit, for political, and/or financial gain.

Pork-Chop on December 30, 2012 at 5:12 PM

I am frankly appalled and would like to see tort reform – this case should be thrown out and the plaintiff should pay the entire costs of the court and the prosecution.

failed to take appropriate steps to protect children from “foreseeable harm.”

What are the appropriate steps?

There is no one anywhere who is entirely safe on this planet. And pray tell, where did we come up with this nice round $100m number?

CorporatePiggy on December 30, 2012 at 5:29 PM

I’m surprised it took this long.

They don’t want guns in schools but yet are mad when there isn’t a plan in place to take down a madman nutbar?

Do they not see the hypocrisy here?

gophergirl on December 30, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Forget it gophergirl, they’re liberals.

kim roy on December 30, 2012 at 5:31 PM

I predict that gun-free zones are going to be wiped out by lawsuits, which regardless of how you feel about lawsuits is a preferable outcome to lives of children being wiped out by gun-free zones and the hippies responsible.

FloatingRock on December 30, 2012 at 2:24 PM

I hope so or at least people will be aware what hazards are involved with remaining in a gun free zone and let them decide whether they are safer or not.

kim roy on December 30, 2012 at 5:33 PM

I predict that gun-free zones are going to be wiped out by lawsuits, which regardless of how you feel about lawsuits is a preferable outcome to lives of children being wiped out by gun-free zones and the hippies responsible.

FloatingRock on December 30, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Well there’s still the potential for weapons related lawsuits in states like Connecticut. Pick your plaintiff – the dead Mrs. Lanza, other Lanzas, Bushmaster, the ammo manufacturer (especially if the ammo is deemed ‘special’), any AR-15 parts manufacturer if the rifle was customized with say a different trigger group, etc. etc.

It has happened before and it will happen again until we get serious tort reform. Lawyers will not take on marginal cases for nothing up front if they are looking at having to fork over $10m in costs when they lose.

CorporatePiggy on December 30, 2012 at 5:36 PM

Someone explain to me why tort reform can’t happen.

Was The Rainmaker just too good?

gatsbysgirlontheside on December 30, 2012 at 5:40 PM

I agree but I would suggest such a lawsuit is never going to be successful when attached to emotionally traumatic incidents like Sandy Hook. And once the emotions return to normal, the chances of getting liberals to go along with the idea of eliminating “gun-free zones” at schools is gone.

Liberals are happy to stand on twenty tiny caskets and declare the need for change. But that never EVER includes upholding the Second Amendment. They like the blood of children for only one reason- they think they can get the guns because of it. They are as ghoulish as the awful greedy “parents” who filed the first lawsuit.

And BTW, I passionately mean every word of the above comments. Liberals don’t give a damn about dead children beyond what they can “do with it” to ban guns. I am quite sure Obama and the Brady Group were high-fiving each other when the death toll of children reached 20.

Happy Nomad on December 30, 2012 at 5:09 PM

^^^^THIS!!^^^^

+1000

Solaratov on December 30, 2012 at 6:23 PM

The negligence was that no teacher or the administrative jerks were not armed to stop him when he entered………Period, no if ands or buts …….
this POS lawyer should sue the state for making the school a gun free zone………PERIOD………..
SUE THE PPL WHO MAKE THE CHILDREN HELPLESS TARGETS, of course our elected officials children have armed guards and SS too protect them…………..IT’S F’IN STUPID………..

angrymike on December 30, 2012 at 6:32 PM

“As a consequence, the … child has sustained emotional and psychological trauma and injury, the nature and extent of which are yet to be determined,

SO GIMME THE MONEY!

GarandFan on December 30, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Liberals don’t give a damn about dead children beyond what they can “do with it” to ban guns. I am quite sure Obama and the Brady Group were high-fiving each other when the death toll of children reached 20.

Happy Nomad on December 30, 2012 at 5:09 PM

.
I’ll go further than that.

I’m seriously considering it was “orchestrated”.

listens2glenn on December 30, 2012 at 7:50 PM

Someone explain to me why tort reform can’t happen.

Was The Rainmaker just too good?

gatsbysgirlontheside on December 30, 2012 at 5:40 PM

.
It can, but the resistance to it (by the Political Elite) is strong.

It’s not in their best interests for tort reform to happen.

listens2glenn on December 30, 2012 at 7:56 PM

As long as you have people trained to accept handouts there never will be:

1 debt reduction
2 tort reform
3 a viable democracy

MaiDee on December 30, 2012 at 10:58 PM

Joshaquinida Doe

Bulletchaser on December 31, 2012 at 2:42 AM

well let see, the “school board” is elected by the community. The community is small enough that many are related to each other. So in essence these suing parents are asking all those taxpayers whose children (grandchildren, nieces, nephews, etc.) were also traumatized, and many of whom are now dead, to pay for the child who was traumatized but lived through the experience?

Bet they voted for Owebama.

katablog.com on December 31, 2012 at 9:24 AM

What a disgusting lawsuit.

bluegill on December 31, 2012 at 10:08 AM

You guys never understand the why.

You claim idealistic twaddle and establish a gun free zone. Fine, but it is just empty words with no means of enforcement: again it is like John Lennon’s “Imagine”.

Of course you have created a safe free fire zone for anyone who wants a body count. You open the door, and people will walk through.

Once you have a slaughter, then you can blame those ‘nasty guns’ rather than your policy which rendered innocents naked to their enemies.

I will say that America is beyond salvation when it ducks duty and responsibility in order to feel good. Nothing new, really, the taint goes back to the Pilgrim Fathers who escaping just persecution, tormented others in their turn. My family considers them hereditary enemies.

Denver Bob on December 31, 2012 at 10:53 AM

I will NEVER understand the selfishness of people. I hope that whoever brought up this lawsuit is found out by the community. There are not enough strong words to describe how vile and disgusting the people who are filing the lawsuit are.

TturnP on December 31, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Sadly, it appears that the posters here don’t remotely understand the scope of this type of litigation. Not only will the school district be targeted as an entity, but each member of the school board, administrators in the chain of command, the estate of the principal and most likely the classroom teacher. Also targeted will be the manufacturer of the PA system, the company that installed it, the company that installed the current security system, the installers and the manufactures. The estate of Lanza’s mother, both his father and brother, the firearms store that Lanza’s mother purchased her firearms from, the range where she practiced, the firearms manufacturer, Lanza’s physician, the pharmacist, the local pharmacy and the pharmaceutical companies regarding any medications Lanza was prescribed.

The lists of targeted defendants will be endless. Most of the targets will not be well off and will need to rely on their homeowners policies to cover their legal fees.

These lawsuits are designed to push as many settlements against as many defendants as possible no matter how remotely they are related to the case. In a high profile case such as this one – the insurers who will be on the hook for the settlements and legal bills will prefer to settle quickly rather than be on the hook for years of litigation that will easily run into the millions of dollars.

2nd Ammendment Mother on December 31, 2012 at 12:20 PM

I will NEVER understand the selfishness of people. I hope that whoever brought up this lawsuit is found out by the community. There are not enough strong words to describe how vile and disgusting the people who are filing the lawsuit are.

TturnP on December 31, 2012 at 11:54 AM

My job frequently brings me in contact with individuals who file these types of suits. You need to realize that the family has been promised millions of dollars in rewards for this lawsuit. I’m sure that they will initially justify their actions as acting in the best interest of their child and maybe changing a policy. But in the end, they won’t care what others think of them or who’s lives/livelihoods they damage or destroy along the way. They will feel entitled and justified to whatever they can grab.

It’s one of the things I’ve come to hate about my job. I no longer see a news story regarding an accident and feel bad for the person injured. I start calculating how many people are about to find themselves mired in tort litigation – which is some of the nastiest individuals you will ever meet in your life.

And the person who profits the greatest will be the attorney who will get at least 50% (usually more)of the settlements/awards and the IRS who taxes lawsuit awards at the same top rate as gambling winnings.

2nd Ammendment Mother on December 31, 2012 at 12:33 PM

It pains me to make such a comparison, but this reminds me of a friend of mine who stepped into a hole in the sidewalk and turned her foot. She immediately filed suit against the municipality for pain, loss of income, emotional distress, and other items. Then she wrecked her car. Now she’s suing the responding police officer’s department for gross negligence because she evidently didn’t DUI test the poor other person to her satisfaction. On Sunday, she was telling me that she was hoping the “Lord will bless me with the money from my first lawsuit” so that she could purchase a new car. It didn’t seem to make an apparent sense to her when I mentioned that it wasn’t the Lord who would be giving her the money, it was the innocent taxpayers of the municipality who would be getting the bill.

I don’t think it will surprise any of you to know she also blamed the fiscal cliff on obstructionist Republicans who “don’t want to raise taxes on billionaires.”

The idea of personal responsibility, of a world where sometimes bad things happen and no one should get sued, is foreign to these people.

JoseQuinones on December 31, 2012 at 3:28 PM

Where is the negligence? Where is the justification for holding your hand out now and demanding to win the lottery while everyone around you is mourning? This is a sad, sad state of affairs.

In the Age of Obama, only a fool tries to earn wealth — the wise jump on any opportunity to have the government give them someone else’s money.

Count to 10 on January 1, 2013 at 12:28 PM

“….it’s not about the money..’

Ya gotta love lawyers.

TimBuk3 on January 2, 2013 at 9:59 AM