Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [infoguys-list] The strange death of Mr. Ranger

Expand Messages
  • debby
    Mr Ranger s widow should be fully compensated for the loss of her husband and the breadwinner of the family. Mr Ralph was partially at fault because he
    Message 1 of 3 , Jan 29, 2005
      Mr Ranger's widow should be fully compensated for the loss of her husband
      and the breadwinner of the family.
      Mr Ralph was partially at fault because he operated a vehicle that he knew
      was missing some safety devises. Iwould have to guess he wanted hes job and
      did not want to quite to have the owner fulfill his dutys as the owner of
      business. Every body seems to be penny rich and dollar poor. The Fuges
      must take the bulk of the responsibility. As the owner he must adheer to
      all the safety rules. A safe place should be a fair expectation of anyone
      on his property. Debby

      -------Original Message-------

      From: Jurydoctor@...
      Date: 01/29/05 05:50:58
      To: opinions-chapel@yahoogroups.com; legalinvestigation@yahoogroups.com;
      courttv_2@yahoogroups.com; Psy-CJ-Law@yahoogroups.com
      Cc: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com; forensic-debate@yahoogroups.com;
      insidecourttv@yahoogroups.com; CourtTV_Fanatic@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [infoguys-list] The strange death of Mr. Ranger





      Here is a new and bizarre case, I need your opinions on.
      all proceeds go to either Schiff Liver Center or
      Ryan .. your choice.
      thanks in advance for your help.
      amy
      On November 2, 2001, Mr. Ranger, owner/operator of a dump truck, traveled to
      a dirt pit to assist with an excavation job. Upon arrival to the job site Mr

      Ranger's dump truck was loaded with the assistance of a 1989 Trackhoe
      operated
      by a Mr. Ralph, and owned by Fuge's Dirt Pit. Custom dictates that after a
      dump truck is fully loaded, the trackhoe operator will blow its horn to
      signal
      the driver of the dump truck to move forward with its load. Unfortunately,
      the
      trackhoe in question did not have a functioning horn. Mr. Ralph has
      testified
      that he signaled with his hand to Mr. Ranger when the truck was full. He
      further testified that Mr. Ranger began to walk towards the front of his
      truck and
      that Mr. Ranger’s tarp was down. Worthy of note is that Mr. Ranger's dump
      truck was unique in that it did not have an automatic electric tarp crank,
      Mr.
      Ranger used a hand crank which required him to exit his truck and crank the
      tarp
      from the outside. Mr. Ralph, the trackhoe operator, testified that he knew
      Mr.
      Ranger had to exit his truck to accomplish this. Following the signal to Mr.
      Ranger, Mr. Ralph backed up an unknown distance and then apparently rotated
      the top boom chassis of the trackhoe in a counter clockwise position. During
      this time, although the exact mechanism of injury is not knowm, Mr. Ranger
      was
      crushed to death between his truck and the boom chassis of the trackhoe
      while
      standing at the rear of his dump truck. It is this death which is the basis
      for
      the pending action in court. An action was brought by Mr. Ranger's widow,
      and
      his three young children.



      There are a number of issues which point to the fault of the deceased, Mr.
      Ranger. Initially, it is expected that as a professional driver, Mr. Ranger
      should have acted more cautiously and avoided the accident. Secondly, the
      defense
      will impute third party fault on the seller or manufacturer of the trackhoe.
      These issues will be explored below.





      The trackhoe in question was purchased by Jack and Jan Fuge, owners of
      Fuge’s
      Dirt Pit from DenMar Enterprises as a used , “as is” tractor. It is not
      disputed that at the time if purchase, the trackhoe did not have a
      functioning
      horn, travel alarm, or rear view mirror. This was known by the operator, Mr.
      Ralph. Mr. Ralph also testified that he knew these safety devices were
      supposed to
      be in place and that he was aware that they were not. It is uncertain
      whether
      Mr. Fuge knew of this necessity. It did have these items, as is required, at
      the time of manufacture, however. Mirrors on a trackhoe are used the same as
      with a car, to view the area behind the tractor. Horns are also used in the
      same manner as with a car, to alarm or signal others. Travel alarms or
      present on
      commercial tractors and sound a high pitched “beep, beep!” when the
      machine
      is moving. The tractor that killed Mr. Ranger had none of these items in
      working condition.



      In an effort to clarify the manufacturer’s position as to the suggested
      use
      of the trackhoe, a coporate engineer’s deposition was taken. Mr. George
      Lump,
      an engineer with 25 years of experience with trackhoes agreed to testify. Mr

      Lump was directly employed by Kobelco (Manufacturer of the trackhoe) and was
      in
      charge of distribution, trading, and application of trackhoes in America.
      Basically, he testified that had Mr. Ralph utilized proper procedures with a
      horn, a travel alarm, and use of the mirror, then Mr. Ranger would probably
      not
      have been killed. He stated the alarms would have been audible and Mr. Ralph
      could have seen him with a rear view mirror. He further opines that in his
      expert
      opinion, Mr. Ralph had a duty to make sure Mr. Ranger had cleared the area
      of
      danger. This could have been accomplished merely by waiting for Mr. Ranger's
      truck to pull out.



      In addition to the above, the operator’s manual for the tractor, suggests
      that a flagman be used for safe operation, that the horn be blown before
      traveling or swinging the boom and that safety requires the operator to
      physically
      check the job site before moving. In addition, the manual emphasizes the
      importance of safety mechanisms such as the travel alarm. The Fuge’s
      maintain the
      trackhoe was sold to them without an operators manual.



      We may never know exactly what Mr. Ranger was doing behind his truck at the
      time of his death. The defense believes that Mr. Ranger disobeyed the
      “signal”
      to leave and returned to the back of his truck placing his own life in
      danger.

      What do you think about?

      What fault, if any, on the part of Mr. Fuge and Mr. Ralph as an employee?





      What fault, if any, of Mr. Ranger ?





      What fault, if any, on the part of the manufacurer?


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






      ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
      Give underprivileged students the materials they need to learn.
      Bring education to life by funding a specific classroom project.
      http://us.click.yahoo.com/FHLuJD/_WnJAA/cUmLAA/aQSolB/TM
      --------------------------------------------------------------------~->

      <p><hr></p>
      To subscribe, send an empty message to <a href=
      mailto:infoguys-list-subscribe@yahoogroups.com">
      infoguys-list-subscribe@yahoogroups.com</a><br/>
      To unsubscribe, send a message to <a href=
      mailto:infoguys-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com">
      infoguys-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com</a><br/>
      <p><hr></p>
      Yahoo! Groups Links








      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.