Comments on: Family overnights RV in Wal-Mart lot, sues over intruder

By: Anonymous Attorney

Anonymous Attorney — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 14:33:45 +0000

All jokes aside, this is an abominable form of liability. It may only be trailed by liability for injuries caused to criminals in the course of their crimes. It fits nowhere into the long-standing tort scheme of “duty, breach, causation, damages.” The lawyers filing these suits should be ashamed of themselves.

It’s also another “sued if you do, sued if you don’t” scenario: suppose Wal-Mart takes the plaintiff’s lawyer seriously when he intones in closing argument that Wal-Mart should have done something. Such as what? Put up an electrified fence? Lawsuit. Patrol the lot? Heavy cost, and inevitable accusations of racism. Prowler and security guard get into scuffle? Lawsuit. ACLU steps in. Class action.

And on it goes.

By: D

Tue, 03 Aug 2010 19:29:52 +0000

I would say that the man who was killed also suffered emotional distress and medical problems. His next of kin should sue Walmart, too.

By: Rebecca On Wheels

Rebecca On Wheels — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 18:11:28 +0000

I travel solo in a small motorhome and worry that those of us who rely on occasional overnight stays at WalMart will lose this valuable privilege because of people who would do something as stupid as open their door to a stranger. The responsibility for prudence and common sense belongs to the RVer. And a shotgun? Equally stupid. I came to check it out on Snopes because it sounded so far-fetched. Guess not.

By: Don

Don — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 14:20:43 +0000

Maybe I need to read the story closer, but wasn’t everyone involved loitering? How was the store supposed to identify the intent between the two different groups?

By: Dennis

Dennis — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 14:17:50 +0000

Scum like that are also likely to get firearms banned fro store parking lots. They should pay Wally World’s legal fess.