Got to read this to believe it.

[Just a new name]

http://www.nj.com/news/jjournal/inde...nal/tort1.html
People, what are you going to do?

[DocLaw]

Sheesh
No matter what now, if the officer knew anything about fire suppression or not, that report of his will be considered 'gospel' by the lawyers suing.
And what was the matter that nobody called 911?
If protocol did not demand that somebody manned the station 24/7, there should not be any liability, or at least, I would hope so.
And disregarding whether or not they were out looking for groceries, what would have happened if there had been a fire elsewhere, the crew was at the fire, and then these people came knocking. Should the department still be liable? Again, I would hope not.
Lawyers - (sigh). Sorry to admit that I am one at times. This could be one of them.

The Doc is out now.

[firemanred]

I PERSONALLY BELIEVE THAT THE DEFENSE ATTORNEY WILL DESTROY THE POLICE OFFICERS CREDIBILITY ON THE STAND, AT LEAST AS FAR AS HIS KNOWLEDGE OF FIRE SUPPRESSION OPERATIONS ARE CONCERNED. AS FOR THE ENGINE CO. NOT BEING IN QUARTERS, DOES IT MAKE A DIFFERENCE IF THEY WERE AT THE GROCERY STORE, ON A EMS RUN, FILLING UP WITH FUEL, ETC. I SAY IT SHOULD NOT. THE PART I AM LEFT CONFUSED ABOUT IN READING THE ARTICLE, IS THE PART WHERE THE POLICE OFFICER SAID THEY DIDN'T HAVE WATER. ?????? I DIDN'T REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT HE MEANT. IT IS SCARY TO ALL OF US THAT THIS TYPE OF LAWSUIT CAN HAPPEN. I CAN ONLY HOPE THAT THE 16 PEOPLE DO NOT WIN IT. IT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT THEY LOST THEIR HOMES, BUT IT HAPPENS TO PEOPLE EVERY DAY.

[DeputyChiefGonzo]

I highly doubt that barrister Markiewicz is doing this case pro bono. Maybe he's trying to make a name for himself.

It seems to me that people are taking advantage for an unfortunate circumstance in an attempt to make a few bucks at the expense of the taxpayers.

This case, if allowed to continue, sets a dangerous precedent. Firefighters and Police officers are on call 24/7, but we can't be everywhere at once.

I feel that the wrath of the those who lost their homes be directed at themselves, some of whom probably had a lot to do with how the fire started in the first place!

[DaSharkie]

Sounds to me like all someone is doing is trying to make a little money. You all know as well as I do that it will probably be settled out of court just to get rid of it and that's all the clients and the lawyer care about. God Bless America. Where else can you get away stupidity.

[E229Lt]

A simple answer would be:

Fire units shall remain in quarters unless called to respond to fires.

1. No building inspections
2. No hydrant inspections
3. No school visits
4. No EMS runs
5. No training/drills outside
6. No driver training
7. No public safety campains
8. No banner hanging
9. NO PROBLEM????

[Dalmatian90]

You can sue anyone for anything at anytime...

Whether ya got a case or not is another matter.

The engine being out of quarters means zip. Unless they normally leave a person in quarters and on watch 24x7, it doesn't matter if they were out getting groceries, on an EMS run, or working a fire across the city. Fire stations aren't always manned.

The Sergeants testimony isn't credible unless you can show he has substantial experience in firefighting -- come on folks, no water in North Hudson? An area that has fire hydrants every 300' or so? Which makes one wonder...did they have a hydrant go kaput, which could cause a fireground scramble??? Yes, you can use the Sergeant's testimony, but a good defense lawyer can get a good chief & officer to explain away many observations...

[Trkco1]

The thing you have to remember, during an interior attack, there is an apperance that nothing is getting done from outside the building. People don't think you're doing anything until they see the ladder pipes and TL's putting the fire out from the exterior. But us as firefighters, we know better.
We teach our kids these days, in case of emergency, Dial 911. Not run across the street and pound on the Firehouse door. So that should be a dead issue. (My opinion only) As far as not being in quarters, is it that big of a deal that they were at the store, OOS training, on another run or in-service inspections. No rule was inplace, as far as I know, to say someone had to man the station constently. So another dead issue. (My opinion only) I'm with Capt Gonzo, we can't be everywhere all the time.

[PAVolunteer]

I decided a long time ago that if my house ever burned, I was going to sue the city for not building a firehouse directly across the street from my house. After all, if they're going to provide adequate fire protection, they should have at least an engine that can get to any house, any where, almost immediately, right? Now, I'm reasonable about this, I only want an engine, the truck can come from a little farther away.

Seriously though, all we can do is hope that any judge with half a brain will see how ludicrous this is and throw it out. It's the mentality of people these days. No one wants to take responsibility for anything, and everyone wants someone else to solve their problem for them, and then blame them when they don't like the solution.

Stay Safe

[firemedic1122]

Since when did cops start determining how a fire attack is to progress? I hope this case does not set a president (sp?) for future cases. If it does, then John Q. Public can start making policy. Yikes! And now that the firefighters are being ordered to have meals ready to go, is the city paying for the meals? That was a joke.

[distchief60b]

E229Lt...we agree on this one. Ridiculuous.....

What if they had been on an ems call...or what if they were coming back from a fire....or out for fuel....

Were their any other calls during the time fo the mothers day fire? If so...I guess they can sue because the fire department was fighting another fire.

How much would it coust to put a fire station on every street....then....would we have enough?

Sounds as if someone is trying to scam some money and make a name for themselves

[SFD13]

Doesn't matter what we do there is always some EXPERT who will find some fault with the way we do our job. Was on vacation and watched a fire dept fight an apartment building fire. That night some civilian was on tv telling everybody how the fire dept was incompetent and if they had done this or that the builidng would have been saved. If the dept had followed his suggestions then I would have gone to a couple of funerals. But since it was on tv, people took it as gospel. Some times you just can't win.

[FFMcDonald]

I know that this condition can vary from state-to-state, but if I remember correctly; NJ has a 'hold Harmless' clause- as it relates to firefighting. So irregardless of the actions of the Fire Department - they cannot be held liable.

What kind of a precedent does this set for the Fire Service --?? If we, as firefighters, have to worry about being sued for negligence, every time we have to respond to a call-- maybe we just have to shut our doors. How many law suits will a department be able to sustain- before they have to close their doors??
What about the actions of the individual that caused the fire? Why not sue them?? Why not sue the electrician who installed the wiring that caused the fire? Why not sue the Building Inspector who failed to notice a bad wiring job?

As for the "police officer" - His comments are crap - when was the last time someone told him how to do his job?

Today's 'ever litigious' society- makes me sick......

[LACAPT]

Here we go again, being held responsable for some contractors or home owners shoddy workmanship and then being judged by some one who has no business judging another proffesion with any credibility. Hopefully there may be a sane judge in the seat of justice when this comes to the bench, but that has yet to be proven in the courts to even exist. Personaly I like what Shakespear had to say about lawyers.

[Guest]

To my Firefighting Brothers and Sisters!!

It is time that we UNITE! For if we don't, the great heritage we all are priviledged to share in the honor of the fire service will be destroyed!

MUTTS are trying to attack the fire service from all angles. Don't know what MUTTS are? MUTTS are people who make life hard for firefighters, EMSers, and cops, just because they can. They have never shown an interest in serving the community in the public safety field, yet they know better. Just ask them!

Be on the lookout for MUTTS, as MUTTS will tell the voters that we really don't need that fire engine for the new developments on the edge of town, we really don't need those new SCBA's, we really don't need NFPA 1710/1720, and any other assortment of lies.

SO BAND TOGETHER! We must educate those members of councils, boards of directors, and most importantly, THE CITIZENS WE ARE HERE TO SERVE! Be prepared for a debate, because no matter how hard we try to teach, a MUTT will be lurking, waiting, and make the most of an opportunity (like a TV camera) to ruin the fire service!

FTM-PTB

[ 09-03-2001: Message edited by: Jolly Roger ]