The Sky Harbor Back Story
So ... what kind of legal recourse, if any, would you pursue? Of course, A. by consuming alcohol, which she already knew negatively influenced her mood and behaviors, Gotbaum herself was an agent. ALTHOUGH she apparently was addicted (and therefore the level of personal responsibility involved in picking up a shot glass may be somewhat tempered) and was flying to Tucson specifically to find help. And B. by knowing of these tendencies, her family perhaps could be considered mildly negligent in not appointing a responsible party to fly and make the change with her (although someone was supposed to meet her at Sky Harbor and do just that). That said, what would you do? P.S. I would like to take the credit, on behalf of all women, for NOT printing "hysterical" in a hed on the story in last Sunday's paper. Someone else wrote it and I spoke up. Perhaps they were unclear on the etymology.
6 comments:
I don't really think there is legal recourse, although it is such a sad, sad story. What is the headline you ended up using?
Agitated woman,
held at Sky Harbor,
dies in custody
Steve, Matt and Jon, what do you think about potential for legal recourse?
I did not know the origin of hysterical. Thank you for speaking out, Diana. What a sad story. It could have gone in so many other directions.
Tell me who I'm representing and I'll tell you what I think about the potential for legal recourse. :)
I would guess the husband has a strong case for some kind of negligence claim, especially since she was in custody when she died, but I really don't know much about this sort of thing. I do know, however, that the estate can deduct whatever was spent on her medical addiction treatment this year in excess of 2% of her adjusted gross income.
That hysterical etymology was surprising.
Good point, Matt. Tell us which side we're on first? Or are we the jury?
Emily: Either side. And/or the jury. Matt: I posted "Quaint, no?" but it didn't save.
Post a Comment