4 ms·

They offered to settle because they've been forced to pay out for similar cases before. Just last year, Republic Services (who is almost certainly who you're re

They offered to settle because they've been forced to pay out for similar cases before. Just last year, Republic Services (who is almost certainly who you're referring to, if not WM, but RSC is closer to $40B) was found responsible in a similar case in Nevada and the mother was awarded $38 million by the jury: https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/local-las-vegas/jury-awards-38-8m-to-family-in-republic-services-wrongful-death-trial-2426094/ https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/local-las-vegas/jury-awa... It doesn't bring your child back, but working with an accident attorney who is compassionate and may be able to wage the battle without too much direct involvement from you may get you more of what you feel is justice in this case. I'm so deeply sorry for your loss, by the way.

Buttons840 5y ago
There is surely a good caring lawyer out there somewhere who can help lift some of the burden the OP is under. What's the easiest way to find that lawyer? Perhaps the OP can contact the family or lawyers involved in the previous litigation you mentioned?
oDot 5y ago
Agreed. Talking to a few lawyers until you find a compassionate one is not a commitment. You can hear what he or she has to say then decide after you have more information.
- specialist 5y ago
  > Talking to a few lawyers until you find... I have no advice on how to find a good, suitable lawyer. It's as hard or harder as any other domain (health, construction, accounting, etc). Like everyone else, I've had suboptimal experiences. I can, however, relate my most recent experience, which was very positive. I compiled a list of prospects. Mostly thru foraging. Also from recommendations. I then called every single one of them. Over time I learned some useful questions to ask. It eventually became completely obvious which lawyers knew what they were talking about, had direct experience with cases like mine, and weren't just hustling to get more work. Especially which lawyers were easy to talk with, who returned calls & followed up, and did what they said they'd do. I narrowed the list down to two. Then I chose the less optimistic one. I felt the person who had fought more battles, had a lower estimate for success, would understand the work involved, had already seen all the traps and pitfalls, and would therefore work smarter. -- All that said... I don't think you (u/bereavedparent) are in any position to pick a lawyer by yourself. I certainly wasn't. You need help. I recruited a friend to help me. Just like having a patient advocate. To help me plan, strategize, maintain the calendar, keep notes, and elevate my mood.
q1w2 5y ago
It's complicated. Very often the jury awards are subsequently slashed by appeals courts, so it's highly unlikely that the mother in the case you mentioned ever received $38MM. It's also important to note, for OP, that non-disclosure agreements are standard in such cases. It should not be construed as an attempt for the company to cover up its actions and "continue killing children". If I were OP, I would consult my lawyer about what specifically can and cannot be discussed. It might be that they simply don't want the father to talk about the settlement amount and the company's misconduct. That might still enable him to discuss/advocate in public more general safety practices for children and sanitation work with the city - while not being in violation of the agreement. At the end of the day - the company isn't "forcing" him to sign the agreement. It's his choice. His family wants him to settle, as probably does his lawyer - because it's probably not worth the extra litigation.
- car_analogy 5y ago
  > It's also important to note, for OP, that non-disclosure agreements are standard in such cases. It should not be construed as an attempt for the company to cover up its actions and "continue killing children". Or, it should be construed that attempts to cover up actions are standard in such cases. Behavior does not become void of motive just because it is "standard": > Trying to hide the body is standard in murder cases. It should not be construed as an attempt of the killer to cover up their guilt.
  - q1w2 5y ago
    This is an overly-cynical take. As any lawyer can confirm, settlements almost ALWAYS contain non-disclosure clauses. The reason is that they cost the plaintiff nothing to sign, and provide the defendant with a limitation of any knock-on liability. It's just totally standard. You can think of it many ways. A settlement can be published in the newspaper causing bad PR for the company, even if they've fixed the issue. It can motivate copy-cat plaintiffs to stage fake "incidents" to try to extort money from the company. It can also cause regulatory inquiries and/or investigations. It can cause other companies to make legal claims on tangentially related issues they might have with the defendant. You'd be amazed what paper thin lawsuits are filed sometimes. Keeping settlements private is just absolutely normal to keep the vultures away.
Trias11 5y ago
Unrelated (and apologies for stepping out of the post' subject), but I lived in multiple countries and then in states within USA. In Vegas now and Republic Services' drivers in Las Vegas are the most considerate, accomodating and friendly people. Granted I live in more friendly Vegas neighborhood but compare to CA and other places i lived in - here it's such a positive surprise.

Buttons840 5y ago

There is surely a good caring lawyer out there somewhere who can help lift some of the burden the OP is under. What's the easiest way to find that lawyer? Perhaps the OP can contact the family or lawyers involved in the previous litigation you mentioned?

oDot 5y ago

Agreed. Talking to a few lawyers until you find a compassionate one is not a commitment. You can hear what he or she has to say then decide after you have more information.

specialist 5y ago
> Talking to a few lawyers until you find... I have no advice on how to find a good, suitable lawyer. It's as hard or harder as any other domain (health, construction, accounting, etc). Like everyone else, I've had suboptimal experiences. I can, however, relate my most recent experience, which was very positive. I compiled a list of prospects. Mostly thru foraging. Also from recommendations. I then called every single one of them. Over time I learned some useful questions to ask. It eventually became completely obvious which lawyers knew what they were talking about, had direct experience with cases like mine, and weren't just hustling to get more work. Especially which lawyers were easy to talk with, who returned calls & followed up, and did what they said they'd do. I narrowed the list down to two. Then I chose the less optimistic one. I felt the person who had fought more battles, had a lower estimate for success, would understand the work involved, had already seen all the traps and pitfalls, and would therefore work smarter. -- All that said... I don't think you (u/bereavedparent) are in any position to pick a lawyer by yourself. I certainly wasn't. You need help. I recruited a friend to help me. Just like having a patient advocate. To help me plan, strategize, maintain the calendar, keep notes, and elevate my mood.

q1w2 5y ago

It's complicated. Very often the jury awards are subsequently slashed by appeals courts, so it's highly unlikely that the mother in the case you mentioned ever received $38MM. It's also important to note, for OP, that non-disclosure agreements are standard in such cases. It should not be construed as an attempt for the company to cover up its actions and "continue killing children". If I were OP, I would consult my lawyer about what specifically can and cannot be discussed. It might be that they simply don't want the father to talk about the settlement amount and the company's misconduct. That might still enable him to discuss/advocate in public more general safety practices for children and sanitation work with the city - while not being in violation of the agreement. At the end of the day - the company isn't "forcing" him to sign the agreement. It's his choice. His family wants him to settle, as probably does his lawyer - because it's probably not worth the extra litigation.

car_analogy 5y ago
> It's also important to note, for OP, that non-disclosure agreements are standard in such cases. It should not be construed as an attempt for the company to cover up its actions and "continue killing children". Or, it should be construed that attempts to cover up actions are standard in such cases. Behavior does not become void of motive just because it is "standard": > Trying to hide the body is standard in murder cases. It should not be construed as an attempt of the killer to cover up their guilt.
- q1w2 5y ago
  This is an overly-cynical take. As any lawyer can confirm, settlements almost ALWAYS contain non-disclosure clauses. The reason is that they cost the plaintiff nothing to sign, and provide the defendant with a limitation of any knock-on liability. It's just totally standard. You can think of it many ways. A settlement can be published in the newspaper causing bad PR for the company, even if they've fixed the issue. It can motivate copy-cat plaintiffs to stage fake "incidents" to try to extort money from the company. It can also cause regulatory inquiries and/or investigations. It can cause other companies to make legal claims on tangentially related issues they might have with the defendant. You'd be amazed what paper thin lawsuits are filed sometimes. Keeping settlements private is just absolutely normal to keep the vultures away.

Trias11 5y ago

Unrelated (and apologies for stepping out of the post' subject), but I lived in multiple countries and then in states within USA. In Vegas now and Republic Services' drivers in Las Vegas are the most considerate, accomodating and friendly people. Granted I live in more friendly Vegas neighborhood but compare to CA and other places i lived in - here it's such a positive surprise.