There was a collision on a ski slope.
He was trying to get $3mil for hit & run. Most of those claims have been tossed. Down to $300,000.
Paltrow countersued for $1 and legal expenses.
Some of this lawyer's examination is like nails on a chalkboard.
Even if she were to prevail (she's fallen short on 90% of the claim), she's probably damaged her career.
I watched it for about half an hour. Had to turn it off. She had yet to make a single legal point.
It was like she was turning a little ski accident into an OJ Simpson murder trial or something.
I do not understand why a case like this would still be in court.
Paltrow would probably toss $50,000 at them just to leave her alone and let her get on with her life.
But $50,000 probably wouldn't cover this "watching paint dry" legal effort.

Model35mech

(2,047 posts)

5. The take home?? Never ski the bunny hill without a helmit cam

Reply to demmiblue (Original post)

Sat Mar 25, 2023, 11:00 AM

Mar 2023

If you don't ski into a millionaire celebrity you still have a shot at going viral on a Jackasses YouTube

Vinca

(53,994 posts)

6. I'm not a skier, but this trial totally puzzles me. Isn't there an inherent risk you take when

Reply to demmiblue (Original post)

Sat Mar 25, 2023, 11:04 AM

Mar 2023

you go to a ski area and go down the hill like a bat out of hell with a whole bunch of other people also going down the hill like bats out of hell? I'm definitely not a Paltrow fan, but the whole lawsuit seems stupid.

zipplewrath

(16,698 posts)

7. It was always a puzzlement

Reply to Vinca (Reply #6)

Sat Mar 25, 2023, 11:57 AM

Mar 2023

States with significant ski industries pass laws protecting the ski resorts from liability, and often have "skier responsibility codes" that put much of the burden on the skier for liability. It was never clear to me what "skier on skier" liability was. Skier collisions were inevitable in a sport where one can fall at a high speed with little to no ability to stop. Alternately there often were skiers that were careless, or reckless and I would often wonder what liability they held.

Sympthsical

(10,969 posts)

8. Apparently his insurance wouldn't pay out unless he sued

Reply to Vinca (Reply #6)

Sat Mar 25, 2023, 12:11 PM

Mar 2023

That's kind of the crux of all this. As far as inherent risk, that's why other defendants were dismissed from the suit. He tried suing the ski lodge, instructors - everyone. But it was thrown out because the sport is inherently risky and he took that risk onto himself.

Apparently he had a Go-Pro on, but the footage is "missing" and the only witness is apparently his friend. The man's daughters also disagree about personality changes in their father.

I can't abide Gwyneth Paltrow, but I don't see it. It feels like a money grab.

So congratulations, universe. You've managed the impossible. I kind of feel bad for Gwyneth Paltrow.

Reply to this discussion