Log in or Sign up

Walmart Faults Tracy Morgan for Not Wearing Seatbelt During Car Accident

Discussion in 'Truckers News' started by drvrtech77, Sep 29, 2014.

Thread Status:: Not open for further replies.

Page 2 of 6

RoadCall Road Train Member

Joined:

Mar 12, 2012

Messages:

1,490

Thanks Received:

936

0

pupeperson said: ↑

As I said is that to my knowledge Wal-Mart has not denied that their driver caused the crash. They are accepting responsibility. That doesn't mean that Tracy Morgan or any other victim in that crash is suddenly going to become the majority shareholder in Wal-Mart, nor should it. All they are doing is what any prudent business would do, and that is to try and protect themselves and their shareholders to the greatest extent possible. I could be wrong, but my surmise is that's exactly what you and your insurance company would do if, God forbid, you should ever find yourself at fault in an accident.
Click to expand...

Well said! And that's exactly right! If my lawyer didn't do the same thing he wouldn't be doing his job. This is common sense not sure how anyone would have a hard time understanding this.

RoadCall, Sep 29, 2014

#11

pupeperson Thanks this.
tucker Road Train Member

Joined:

Jun 13, 2008

Messages:

12,647

Thanks Received:

40,424

Location:

IN

0

Maybe the Walmart driver was cooking a pizza on his engi...

tucker, Sep 29, 2014

#12
sailboatjim Light Load Member

Joined:

Aug 27, 2014

Messages:

292

Thanks Received:

173

Location:

Boston, Mass

0

pupeperson said: ↑

Sounds like an appropriate affirmative defense to me.... All they are saying is that there was contributing negligence on the part of the plaintiffs, and, just like Wal-Mart doesn't deny that their driver caused the accident, it's going to be hard for the plaintiffs to deny that they would probably have been better off had they been properly restrained.
Click to expand...

I agree with this.................

sailboatjim, Sep 29, 2014

#13
Skate-Board Road Train Member

Joined:

Aug 9, 2014

Messages:

3,801

Thanks Received:

3,996

Location:

Merrimack, NH

0

Walmart has always stood up to anyone and never knuckles under. Even that person who had cancer and was on medicinal pot. She was still fired because she failed the drug test.

Why? Because they know everyone will still shop there.

Skate-Board, Sep 29, 2014

#14
Vito Heavy Load Member

Joined:

Jun 4, 2012

Messages:

878

Thanks Received:

950

Location:

North Carolina

0

Rut ro, here we go again...

Anyway, I'm sure Morgan could have minimized his injuries had he been properly restrained. But the title of this thread is misleading... "Walmart Faults..." It sounds like his injuries could have been totally prevented... I'm sure he would have been injured anyway in that wreck. But him NOT wearing a seatbelt is a mitigating circumstance and any lawyer, any lawyer, would pursue this in order to decrease the settlement amount. It really has nothing to do with someone's opinion about a "scummy" company.

Vito, Sep 29, 2014

#15

RavenHairedGemini and Pedigreed Bulldog Thank this.
orangepicker Road Train Member

Joined:

Nov 9, 2011

Messages:

1,159

Thanks Received:

679

Location:

florida

0

do we have a choice but to shop at wal mart...not in my town k-mart baled

orangepicker, Sep 29, 2014

#16

Raiderfanatic Thanks this.
Marksteven Road Train Member

Joined:

Apr 24, 2009

Messages:

1,364

Thanks Received:

1,369

Location:

Bumble Fxxx

0

Skate-Board said: ↑

Walmart has always stood up to anyone and never knuckles under. Even that person who had cancer and was on medicinal pot. She was still fired because she failed the drug test.

Why? Because they know everyone will still shop there.
Click to expand...

I wont and i dont! I would rather pay more and shop at Target or Shopko. The Walmart croud here is as Nasty as they get.

Marksteven, Sep 29, 2014

#17

'olhand and kona911 Thank this.
SHO-TYME Road Train Member

Joined:

Apr 20, 2011

Messages:

3,425

Thanks Received:

3,179

Location:

Dahlonega, GA

0

pupeperson said: ↑

Sounds like an appropriate affirmative defense to me.... All they are saying is that there was contributing negligence on the part of the plaintiffs, and, just like Wal-Mart doesn't deny that their driver caused the accident, it's going to be hard for the plaintiffs to deny that they would probably have been better off had they been properly restrained.
Click to expand...

Hold your calls, we have a winner!!!!

SHO-TYME, Sep 29, 2014

#18
Marksteven Road Train Member

Joined:

Apr 24, 2009

Messages:

1,364

Thanks Received:

1,369

Location:

Bumble Fxxx

0

joseph1135 said: ↑

Wow. That takes balls. As if I wouldn't be surprised by anything else from the world's scummiest retailer.
Click to expand...

Personally I agree with you. Not only that, I blame Walmart for Destroying Home town retail and running Mom and Pop stores out of buisness

Marksteven, Sep 29, 2014

#19

'olhand, chalupa, joseph1135 and 1 other person Thank this.
drvrtech77 Road Train Member

Joined:

Mar 20, 2010

Messages:

15,083

Thanks Received:

146,326

0

pupeperson said: ↑

As I said is that to my knowledge Wal-Mart has not denied that their driver caused the crash. They are accepting responsibility. That doesn't mean that Tracy Morgan or any other victim in that crash is suddenly going to become the majority shareholder in Wal-Mart, nor should it. All they are doing is what any prudent business would do, and that is to try and protect themselves and their shareholders to the greatest extent possible. I could be wrong, but my surmise is that's exactly what you and your insurance company would do if, God forbid, you should ever find yourself at fault in an accident.
Click to expand...

Walmart never accepted responsibilty they just acknowledged that their truck was involved.

drvrtech77, Sep 29, 2014

#20

joseph1135 Thanks this.

(You must log in or sign up to reply here.)

Page 2 of 6

Thread Status:: Not open for further replies.

Search