The venue should counter-sue his estate for inflicting emotional damage on the staff of the venue.

"Defendants improperly used a 'sticky substance' such as double-sided tacky tape to increase friction on the banister and deter concertgoers from sliding down it," the complaint states. "Unfortunately, this 'sticky substance' caused decedent Dr. Verma to lose his center of gravity and caused him to drop in between the staircase and the wall."
In addition to the sticky substance, the lawsuit also blames the concert hall's design for his death."

The sticky substance serves a purpose. Elderly and disabled people who may need to use it, don't necessarily have the hand strength to cope with a slick railing for support.

Unless New York has seriously jacked up liability laws, this is a loser of a case.

If there's an afterlife, I wonder whether Dr. Rajan Verma is thinking, "Those damned concert hall builders just caused my death!" or "Whoops. Guess that was a stupid thing to do."

I'm guessing it's the latter. Perhaps his mother should think along those lines.

If there had been a problem with the stairs themselves that caused him to fall, then yes, I can understand holding the concert hall being held accountable. But if he wants to use a handrail for an unintended purpose, that's on him.

But the depressing part of all this is that she'll win. Or at least get a fat settlement to discourage her from going forward when she realizes she'll make more money by settling, rather than winning a case in which her ambulance-chasing attorney will soak up most of her winnings.

Oh, fuck this woman. Any sympathy I would have had for a woman that has lost a child just dried when she decided that her son's death was her opportunity to cash in.

And perhaps this might sound callous, but why on earth should she collect anything because her son died? Unless she was his dependent, I don't think she should get anything, even if her son did die due to negligence on the part of the concert hall.

When did we decide that death was our opportunity to cash in, regardless of our relation to the deceased? Yes, if it's a dependent child whose parent died due to someone else's negligence, then absolutely. Give the child a fat settlement when he turns 18, and give the surviving parent enough money to care for the child until he turns 18. But a mother who lost a non-dependent child? It's tragic, absolutely, but it's not a hardship. Why is she entitled to anything?

Interesting point, Patrick. It seems like we hear more and more about "the victim's family" suing over deaths... and that family includes people like aunts and uncles and siblings of adults. In what way does this person's death deprive the family of support they were dependent on?

Isn't that the issue with pain and suffering damages Patrick? There are no economic damages here. I expect it is all pain and suffering she is suing over. But that applies to the cake non-bakers too. As one of the ladies put it, not getting the wedding cake made her feel like less of a person. Hence she deserved money. But as with most non-economic damages, how do you assign economic value to non-economic damage? The only answer seems to be poorly and irregularly.

People shouldn't be able to sue over death caused by stupidity. Yesterday I read that a woman was suing Ikea for millions of dollars because her son tried to climb a dresser they'd purchased from Ikea. It tipped over on him and killed him. She says Ikea didn't properly warn her that furniture could tip over. Meanwhile, the dresser came with anchors to strap it to the wall so it wouldn't tip over. She didn't use them. I hope that case gets thrown out, but it won't.

Ben, I agree. And I also agree that the lesbian couple probably weren't entitled to collect.

I say "probably" because there was a certain article that has since been taken down (Amy knows about it; I saw it on her Twitter feed). This article claimed that the besieged bakers actually publicized their legal dispute with the lesbian couple along with the couple's names and contact information, which allowed certain fine, upstanding "Christians" to voice their displeasure with the couple in the form of death threats.

Amy, quite responsibly, notified her Twitter followers (of which I am one) that the article has since been taken down (presumably because they got the facts wrong?), so I don't know if any of this bears any resemblance to the truth. I'm guessing probably not.

However, on the off-chance that this story is true, I would agree that the lesbians are entitled to compensation for their "pain and suffering." If I'm involved with a legal dispute with you, and you choose to publicize it along with my contact information, causing me to be on the receiving end of death threats (provided you could reasonably be expected to know that death threats would happen), yes, I will sue you in civil court, and no, I will not feel bad for you when you're driven into bankruptcy when I collect.

But if that story is not true (and it probably isn't), and the lesbian couple collected because, oh, boo-hoo-hoo, getting refused by a baker made one of them feel like "less of a person," then all I could say to them is, "Shouldn't you be living at home with your mommies like all the other five year old girls?"

Those are the only people I can think of who have the right to "feel like less of a person" because a baker won't make them any cake. If you're a small child, I can understand the heartbreak. But adults need to base their self-worth on something a little bit more dependable than a wedding cake. If I were the judge, I'd order the bakers to buy the lesbian couple two copies of "The Six Pillars of Self-Esteem" by Nathaniel Branden, and issue a court order than the lesbians read them. And let's be real; they're lesbians. Not to sound heartless, but I seriously doubt that this is the first time in their lives they've faced discrimination. How could they have navigated to this point in their lives if they're going to go to pieces when a baker says no? How could they possibly survive afterwards if they're this fragile?

I mean, God forbid they're walking down the street and someone yells "Lesbo dykes!" or some such out the car window. They'll have to be placed on suicide watch.

I would have no objection if the penalty were fines imposed by the state for violating a state accommodation law (I think that's what Isab called it). But compensation for any couple because they were refused a wedding cake? Oh, get the hell over it. You weren't refused life-saving surgery. It was a stupid cake.

Regarding "pain and suffering," it's what I like about Florida. They only award pain and suffering for permanent damage. Otherwise, hospital bills and lost wages, and that's all you get when you're injured in an accident.

It's one of the reasons I became disenchanted with my work as a massage therapist at a multidisciplinary clinic which took accident victims. One patient said to me, "They're only giving me [x] thousand dollars."

"Oh?" I said, expecting more.

"Well, that only covers my wages and medical expenses."

"What else should it cover?" wondering if perhaps the accident caused him to miss a mortgage payment or something.

"Me!" he said, as if the answer should be obvious.

Of course. How could I be so dumb? You get into an accident and it's like winning the lottery. Silly me.

People actually used to ask our doctors, without the slightest hint of embarrassment, "Can you make sure they find something that will give me permanent disability?"

One patient, a teacher, asked that. And all she had was Bell's palsy (temporary partial facial paralysis, easily treated). Be serious. No shame any more.

Doctor?

Supposedly a person of higher-than-average intelligence. Sliding down banisters in public venues? Is this the guy you want doing surgery on you?

========================================

I wonder if, when he did his ER or pathology rotation, he came across people injured or killed while doing stupid things and mocked them.

Karma, Dr. Verma, is a bitch.

========================================

I tried to do slide down the banister as a child when we lived in an old house, but the rickety banister shook under my weight and disabused me of that notion quickly.

Sticky banisters are terrible for sliding.

One should always test the banister before attempting to slide down it. Run your hands down it. If it's sticky or rickety, don't slide.

========================================

Why doesn't Mom sue Hollywood for promoting banister sliding? Banisters in the movies always support the weight and are always getting successfully slid down.

That's crazy that the mother would sue.

Everyone knows lawsuits take too long. Today, when an entirely preventable tragedy strikes an idiot, everyone knows that the first thing to do is set up a Kickstarter for immediate financial results.

Is there any kind of cash prize to the estate of Darwin Award winners? I doubt it, but if there was Dr. Verma's parents would have a better chance applying for that instead of suing the theater.

If the Silver Surfer teamed up with Iron Man, would that make them alloys?

And perhaps this might sound callous, but why on earth should she collect anything because her son died? Unless she was his dependent, I don't think she should get anything, even if her son did die due to negligence on the part of the concert hall.

Fair point.

However, it would be his estate that would have standing to sue. I'm going to guess that as next of kin, she is (or would likely be) the estate's executor. And even if a probate judge appointed a third party to this task, they would have a fiduciary duty to at least examine the feasibility of such legal action.

If successful, any settlement would go into the estate, which would then pay off creditors. Any left over money would then be distributed according to the terms of the will, or decided by the probate judge. Next of kin moving to the top of the list being most likely.

This would be actually important, because if the mother files suit directly and wins, that money is tax exempt, if I recall correctly. Inheritance is not. A large award to the estate would be able to trigger a sizable tax liability.

Heck, even if he had been 8, it wouldn't be the venue's fault!

Hey, Ma, how about suing yourself for not teaching your son how to act in public.

Also, if the venue was found to be negligent in the death, they would be on the hook for a rather sizable amount.

A medical doctor of 28 years? I'd need an actuarial to estimate the earnings he'd be able to make over the next, oh, say 31 years (retire @ 59) as a MD. Let's see...that's likely to be a Texas sized shit load money.

And having Read The Fine Article, ummm...I wouldn't feel confident that the venue will be able to escape unharmed. This doesn't look so good:

He "rode the banister" at the top staircase and tried to ride a second set of railings but fell near the top of a balcony due to a sticky substance on the banister, the lawsuit claims.

Trigger alert! This comment is going to be cold-hearted. You've been warned; so don't sue me!

This guy was a "medical resident"?

Well, thank goodness he died before he became a full-fledged doctor and could inflict any of his stupidity on actual patients.

Mom's suing for $2.5 mill for "wrongful death."

We may run out of oil and deplete our aquifers but one thing we'll never run out of is people who sue others instead of taking responsibility and lawyers who eagerly assist them.

When I was a kid, we used to go swimming at three lakes in Roseville, a suburb north of St. Paul. A couple of those lakes had slides and water wheels out in the water. They were a blast to play on. But then, some kid got hurt and the parents sued (or Roseville was concerned, rightfully so, that a kid would get hurt and the parents would sue) so the slides and water wheels were removed.

She says Ikea didn't properly warn her that furniture could tip over.
I call bullshit. Every set of instructions with anything that might someday tip over, has warnings all over them about it. Even if they are those silly Ikea guys.

This story?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2015/07/sweet-cakes-by-melissa-didnt-just-deny-a-lesbian-couple-service-they-also-doxxed-them-and-their-kids.html

And if had rocketed friction-free to the bottom and THEN cracked his brain pan there would have been no lawsuit, yes?

I'm just waiting for someone to say "At least he died doing what he enjoyed."

I almost drowned while goofing off at a public pool when I was a kid. Instead of suing the pool, my mother thanked the lifeguard and told me not to do it again.

She says Ikea didn't properly warn her that furniture could tip over.

Why would anyone need to be told that an object taller than it is wide can possibly tip over? You don't exactly need a degree in physics to understand this. Even a four-year-old knows that much.

Conan, obviously, you should have sued your mother.

Sliding down a bannister sounds like something a typical guy would do to impress someone. Intelligence often takes a back seat for guys at such times. Clearly, the venue did anticipate this action, and their solution was wrapping it in double sided tape. Seems like a fairly dumb thing to do. Not that I know what they should have done, but adding a barrier to the gap springs to mind. You lawsuit haters will enjoy this, a guy crossed the tracks in front of a commuter train and was hit and blasted into several pieces, which were then flung through the air. A large chunk of torso hit a woman and knocked her off the platform. His family sued the rail system, and the woman sued that family. I didn't follow up to see who got the money, but probably you could Google it.