CoronaVirus

[coltboostin]

Look at this red-blooded local American hero.....

 

http://www.competitionplus.com/drag-racing/news/bill-bader-intends-to-open-norwalk-facility-regardless-of-federal-restrictions-in?fbclid=IwAR1Vcb-Hlr9l3LgOaIgFEF5YqRNeKLKGYrFYCnqDvz-ZC6JiAqPM-MDfLno

 

 

Wagner, you should come up for opening day! Sell your pics to the major news networks for big$$$

[Furloaf]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-military-sympt-idUSKCN21Y2GB

 

60% may be asymptomatic.

Really need antibody testing going.

[spankis]

My common sense doesn't tell me that if my career takes a hard right into the ditch because of unforeseen circumstances I kill myself. If that's common sense to everybody else thats a shame.

[Geeto67]

Look at this red-blooded local American hero.....

 

http://www.competitionplus.com/drag-racing/news/bill-bader-intends-to-open-norwalk-facility-regardless-of-federal-restrictions-in?fbclid=IwAR1Vcb-Hlr9l3LgOaIgFEF5YqRNeKLKGYrFYCnqDvz-ZC6JiAqPM-MDfLno

 

 

Wagner, you should come up for opening day! Sell your pics to the major news networks for big$$$

 

So here is a fun legal theory that has never been and could not be tested until now...

 

If you are not an essential business and you defy state orders to close or remain closed, and there is a covid outbreak at your venue, can you be civilly sued for the damage?

 

The short answer is leaning toward yes you can. Why? as a venue owner you have a responsibility to provide a reasonably safe enviornment for your patrons. If the state has told you that having a large group of people at your venue is not deemed safe, then you have been put on notice that opening for business is not creating a safe enviornment and you have waived any protections you may have under the law and assume liability for exactly the type of harm you have been warned about. I say it's a theory, because we haven't had an opportunity to test it in the courts, and if people were smart they wouldn't even temp fate considering the millions at stake from a judgment not in their favor. the closest analogy we have is when hotels get sued for legionaires disease (which is common) which relies on negligence on the part of the hotel - in this case defying a health based state order would def qualify as negligence.

 

now before all the bullshit armchair lawyers chime in and say "well people should take responsibility for themselves and not attend" well not so fast. look at what Bill Bader is saying:

 

" I'm looking at outbreaks being down. I'm looking at the amount of fatalities being down and yet [Mainstream Media's] not taking their foot off the gas, which leads me to believe that there's something else at play. What's really driving the shutdown of America? What's the machine behind the curtain that's driving this?"

 

If he is suggesting that the spread of the disease is not an issue, or that the state order is in place because of reasons not related to health, there are people that could reasonable rely on these statements that he is saying hosting an event there is safe. Any subsequent outbreak would turn on those statements. These are the things that would absolutley be litigated over in any trial.

 

Personally I am torn over this decision. I have booked tickets and hotels for hotrod power tour the first week of june and Norwalk is the first stop. If it is open and safe, then I am elated to go as dad and I will be taking the 57 vette he and I restored in the 90's and he just restored again this year. However, I don't believe it is safe yet, and I doubt it will be safe and I could see this being a shit show that I am not willing to put mine or 75 year old dad's life at risk for.

 

Also there is a third dimension and that is he is helping Hot Rod steal my money. It's cost me $1200 to book hotel and platnum package this year, and power tour tickets are not refundable unless they cancel the event. By him staying open, he and hot rod can claim that the event is not cancelled, even if it is unsafe for people to attend. Hot rod doesn't cancel, doesn't have to refund any tickets, and Norwalk doesn't have to give back the booking fee for the venue for a cancelled event. If this is really what is in play, then it's the lowest form of scam perpertrated on car guys. Ask for a donation I'll give it, hold a fundraiser to support local tracks and i'll buy what you are selling, but try to steal mine and thousands of other car people's money in this way? that's daring people to sue you.

 

anyway. there is something fun (ok maybe not fun but interesting) to think about.

[oh8sti]

My common sense doesn't tell me that if my career takes a hard right into the ditch because of unforeseen circumstances I kill myself. If that's common sense to everybody else thats a shame.

 

Not sure If that’s directed at me or someone else.

 

I didn’t say that, so I don’t think it’s me?

[wagner]

Look at this red-blooded local American hero.....

 

http://www.competitionplus.com/drag-racing/news/bill-bader-intends-to-open-norwalk-facility-regardless-of-federal-restrictions-in?fbclid=IwAR1Vcb-Hlr9l3LgOaIgFEF5YqRNeKLKGYrFYCnqDvz-ZC6JiAqPM-MDfLno

 

 

Wagner, you should come up for opening day! Sell your pics to the major news networks for big$$$

 

If I go it will be for official work business and that means I can't sell my shots. Besides, I'll let Mike the track photog do that, he's an amazing person and needs that money.

 

There are tracks that have already opened for testing. Darlington had 40 or 50 cars yesterday.

 

It really isn't that hard to run a race with some social distancing and such. Jessie Adams did it out in California a month ago. People just need to follow rules and outsiders need to mind their business.

[Mallard]

Really sucks to hear, Wags...but I certainly respect your take on what's going on in the industry. It's only been 4-6 weeks of COVID-craziness, and we see too many chinks in the armor. I was surprised when Accu-Air abruptly shut down seemingly overnight.

 

 

 

Being an optimist, I'm hopeful that even if we go through these extreme depths...maybe we come out the other side reorganizing some of the sport/hobby industries with new sanctioning bodies, groups, etc... bring it back down to a grassroots level. Nature abhors a vacuum.

Something doesn't seem right with Accu-air being considered a casualty of COVID. By April 3rd (when it looks like they announced bankruptcy) they would have only been under a forced stay-at-home order for 2-3 weeks, and they should have been able to still make online sales. So can someone explain how they went insolvent that quickly (if they were doing well to begin with)? Seems to me that they were in trouble before this even happened.

 

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Mace1647545504]

My son and I were talking about events last night and here is my take.

I think if a venue can hold, let's say 6000 people for easy math and we still have to maintain social distancing i think they will permitted to sell maybe 1500 tickets.

Seats will be marked off to maintain the distance between each person.

Will something like that work , I don't know. Will ticket prices go up because of it, it don't know.

But this should only take place until a vaccine is brought out.

The BIG issue are the anti- vaxxers and they should all be shot anyway because they will propagate and put the same stupid idea into their children.

[Mallard]

My son and I were talking about events last night and here is my take.

 

I think if a venue can hold, let's say 6000 people for easy math and we still have to maintain social distancing i think they will permitted to sell maybe 1500 tickets.

 

Seats will be marked off to maintain the distance between each person.

 

Will something like that work , I don't know. Will ticket prices go up because of it, it don't know.

 

But this should only take place until a vaccine is brought out.

 

The BIG issue are the anti- vaxxers and they should all be shot anyway because they will propagate and put the same stupid idea into their children.

I think they're going to resume without fans first, since the teams/league make a lot of money on TV rights and advertising. Possibly they'll let people into the private/luxury boxes with capacity limits, but general admission ticket sales are going to be problematic as long as social distancing is in place.

 

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Mace1647545504]

I think they're going to resume without fans first, since the teams/league make a lot of money on TV rights and advertising. Possibly they'll let people into the private/luxury boxes with capacity limits, but general admission ticket sales are going to be problematic as long as social distancing is in place.

 

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

 

The boxes are tiny well not tiny but not conducive to social distancing , I've been in a few here in columbus. I think letting some fans in will appease the athletes that want to play in front of people.

I also think anyone let in will have to be masked and possibly their temp taken before being admitted.

[cruizin01]

In regards to suing, etc for larger events. Can you prove that the person got the virus at that specific event? I mean if someone is going to something like this then its likely they have already been out in public either before and or after the event. I just question how far you could really take that course of action.

[Gergwheel1647545492]

In regards to suing, etc for larger events. Can you prove that the person got the virus at that specific event? I mean if someone is going to something like this then its likely they have already been out in public either before and or after the event. I just question how far you could really take that course of action.

 

that was my first thought too when i read Kerry's novella. Prove to me that you got coronaids from Norwalk

[greg1647545532]

that was my first thought too when i read Kerry's novella. Prove to me that you got coronaids from Norwalk

 

That's kinda what epidemiologists do, though. Already there are hundreds of genetic variations in the novel coronavirus, they don't amount to different "strains" yet because they all attack cells using the same mechanism still but they do allow researchers to track movement of the virus.

 

If a known carrier goes to Norwalk and a bunch of people come out with the same genetic variant, and there's no other reasonable explanation for how all of those people would have caught it, and one of them dies... well it wouldn't be hard to get expert witnesses from the epidemiology world to testify that they were xx% certain that the spread happened at Norwalk. And then like Kerry said, it'd be a civil lawsuit, which doesn't have as high of a burden of proof.

 

I think it's probably unlikely that anyone would bother but you'd have to ask yourself if it's worth the risk.

[10phone2]

then the carrier would be personally liable for damages if norwalk did not know in advance they were. If a facility has a sign that says no firearms allowed on property and an employee goes on a shooting rampage, then the company is not liable. The same could be said for sam's club, costo, wal-mart etc. I don't see much protesting pushing to keep them closed.

[Geeto67]

In regards to suing, etc for larger events. Can you prove that the person got the virus at that specific event? I mean if someone is going to something like this then its likely they have already been out in public either before and or after the event. I just question how far you could really take that course of action.

 

Greg covered the mechanics of how someone might prove it so I will just add some process color.

 

Whether you contracted it at the venue is what is considered a "triable issue of fact" - meaning it is one of the the things that a plaintiff will have to prove and a defendant will have to defend against at trial. As long as the question as to whether it was possible to contract it at the venue exists (and it would if the venue was ignoring state requirements) it would not keep the trial from going forward.

 

So would a person be able to sue and go to trial? yes. Would they be able to win that suit? Maybe, it seems likely as per greg's explination.

 

I think it's probably unlikely that anyone would bother but you'd have to ask yourself if it's worth the risk.

 

If Norwark opens, holds an event, there is a covid outbreak, and someone(s) dies from this, I think it is highly likely that their loved ones would sue. It would be a wrongful death case and which not only carries pretty high recovery amounts, but due to ignoring state recomendations would qualify for punitive damages (monetary awards meant to punish the person responsible because of bad fath or extreme negligence).

[greg1647545532]

then the carrier would be personally liable for damages if norwalk did not know in advance they were. If a facility has a sign that says no firearms allowed on property and an employee goes on a shooting rampage, then the company is not liable. The same could be said for sam's club, costo, wal-mart etc. I don't see much protesting pushing to keep them closed.

 

You're missing that in this scenario there's a standing order not to open for safety reasons. If there's a killer on the loose and the governor says "No events because this guy might show up and shoot everyone," and they open anyway and a guy shows up and shoots everyone.... that's on the place for defying the order.

 

eta: Well maybe it's not "on the place" but I do think it would open them up to a lawsuit from the victim's families.

[BuckeyeROC]

then the carrier would be personally liable for damages if norwalk did not know in advance they were. If a facility has a sign that says no firearms allowed on property and an employee goes on a shooting rampage, then the company is not liable. The same could be said for sam's club, costo, wal-mart etc. I don't see much protesting pushing to keep them closed.

 

No rona zone signs. Violators will be shot on sight.

 

[Geeto67]

You're missing that in this scenario there's a standing order not to open for safety reasons. If there's a killer on the loose and the governor says "No events because this guy might show up and shoot everyone," and they open anyway and a guy shows up and shoots everyone.... that's on the place for defying the order.

 

eta: Well maybe it's not "on the place" but I do think it would open them up to a lawsuit from the victim's families.

 

I will add to this that one of the reasons the state has imposed these restrictions due to the lack of testing, so you can't expect an individual to "know" they have it, but you can expect the state restrictions to have have taken it into account.

 

If a person knew they were infected and went anyway, yes they would have liability as well. It doesn't let the venue off the hook if they defy state restrictions - they would still be on the hook for contributory negligence for defying state restrictions and their burden would be less, but it wouldn't be zero.

 

You would still have to prove that the infected individual knew, and in an enviornemnt without testing where many carriers are asymptomatic, that's a hard to thing to do. Also, compensation speaking the venue is a better target because it's a business with assets and insurance policies that far exceed what any individual would have, so it is better suited to pay the damages.

[Exodus]

I will add to this that one of the reasons the state has imposed these restrictions due to the lack of testing, so you can't expect an individual to "know" they have it, but you can expect the state restrictions to have have taken it into account.

 

 

 

If a person knew they were infected and went anyway, yes they would have liability as well. It doesn't let the venue off the hook if they defy state restrictions - they would still be on the hook for contributory negligence for defying state restrictions and their burden would be less, but it wouldn't be zero.

 

 

 

You would still have to prove that the infected individual knew, and in an enviornemnt without testing where many carriers are asymptomatic, that's a hard to thing to do. Also, compensation speaking the venue is a better target because it's a business with assets and insurance policies that far exceed what any individual would have, so it is better suited to pay the damages.

 

Have everyone sign wavers at the door? I mean no one is entitled to go, nor does the venue have to let anyone in.

 

Then I suppose you could go down the route of: What if someone got sick at the event and then outside of the event they are shopping at Kroger and get someone there sick and that person finds out the other person was at a big event and tries to sue? I suppose then you would have to prove they got it at the event which I assume would be really hard to prove.

 

Idk just throwing stuff out there.

 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[10phone2]

You're missing that in this scenario there's a standing order not to open for safety reasons. If there's a killer on the loose and the governor says "No events because this guy might show up and shoot everyone," and they open anyway and a guy shows up and shoots everyone.... that's on the place for defying the order.

 

eta: Well maybe it's not "on the place" but I do think it would open them up to a lawsuit from the victim's families.

 

the same could be said for any retailer selling non-essential items which happens in bulk at costco, big box retailer, or card dealerships you can walk into. one of the problems with the stay at home orders is they are logically inconsistent.

[greg1647545532]

the same could be said for any retailer selling non-essential items which happens in bulk at costco, big box retailer, or card dealerships you can walk into. one of the problems with the stay at home orders is they are logically inconsistent.

 

Quite true.

[10phone2]

Quite true.

 

air high five

 

And now this from cnn:

http://www.cnn.com/2020/04/17/us/quaranteam-coronavirus-wellness-trnd/index.html

[Mallard]

air high five

 

 

 

And now this from cnn:

 

http://www.cnn.com/2020/04/17/us/quaranteam-coronavirus-wellness-trnd/index.html

I have no issue with this. If you've been at home alone for 3 weeks already there's very low risk. Go for it.

 

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Geeto67]

Have everyone sign wavers at the door? I mean no one is entitled to go, nor does the venue have to let anyone in.

 

you can't waive illegal behavior. If the venue is defying a state of emergency state requirement (which is enforcable by law) then it is acting illegaly and must take the responsibility for its actions.

 

Yes you can make the case that the individual was aware of the state restrictions and chose to attend, but once that attendee becomes a plaintiff, they are going to say that the venue made them believe they were safe by saying the restrictions were unnecessary and defying them.

 

 

Then I suppose you could go down the route of: What if someone got sick at the event and then outside of the event they are shopping at Kroger and get someone there sick and that person finds out the other person was at a big event and tries to sue? I suppose then you would have to prove they got it at the event which I assume would be really hard to prove.

 

Idk just throwing stuff out there.

 

It doesn't really work like that. Once the individual leaves the venue, and knows or has reason to know that they are infected, it is on them to act accordingly, so they assume the liability if they don't and infect someone else. It doesn't go back to the venue. Considering Kroger is considered essential and is not acting illegaly, any infection that occurs on their premesis they are not liable for. Practically speaking in an individual case I am not sure how you would prove it in court (or even identify the person who transmited it to you).

 

There is one way I can see subsequent non-attendees having standing to sue Norwalk - and that is if opening the track caused such a mass infection that it caused the state's overall numbers to go up. IF they hold an event and 5 people get sick and die, yeah it will be a tragedy, but it doesn't create standing for other's infected by those 5 to sue the venue. But if they hold an event and 30% of the attendees get infected, and those attendees cause ohio's overall numbers to rise in any statistically significant way, then not only may those subsequently infected seek to sue (possibly under a class acton) but the state may seek criminal action against the track as well.

 

The whole point of this intellectual exercise is to look at the actions of business owners defying the state and really say: "Is this worth it?". Even if the state isn't enforcing violations of the state orders, I don't understand why any venue owner would take this risk at all.

[Geeto67]

the same could be said for any retailer selling non-essential items which happens in bulk at costco, big box retailer, or card dealerships you can walk into. one of the problems with the stay at home orders is they are logically inconsistent.

 

eh...maybe. If your business sells essential items, like all the big box retailers do, then you are allowed to stay open and sell non-essential items as well. It would be too onerous to ask the businesses to sell only essential items. You have to draw the line somewhere, and they chose to draw it at what was the least burdensome to the retailers. The goal is to cutdown on people interacting with other people so it's easiest for everyone to look at the business at the service level and not closer. Essential is not determined at the employee level, but at the general public at large level.

 

for reference here is the definition of essential (pages 5-8, heading 12):

 

https://coronavirus.ohio.gov/static/publicorders/Directors-Stay-At-Home-Order-Amended-04-02-20.pdf