I am sure Tony will be glad when all of this MESS is over......And so will I .....Money will not bring back their child...
Hearing explores key questions for Tony Stewart in Kevin Ward Jr. case
A hearing before a federal judge in New York on Friday will explore key questions on the lawsuit brought by the parents of Kevin Ward Jr. against Tony Stewart. Ward was killed in a collision with Stewart's car in 2014 in New York.
Attorneys for Tony Stewart and the parents of Kevin Ward Jr. will be in U.S. District Court in Utica, N.Y., for a summary judgment hearing Friday as part of the Ward family's wrongful death lawsuit against Stewart. During an Empire Super Sprints race Aug. 9, 2014, at Canandaigua (N.Y.) Motorsports Park, Kevin Ward Jr. got out of his car after a crash and approached Stewart's car, which struck and killed the 20-year-old driver. Stewart was not criminally charged.
What is the purpose of the hearing?
The Ward family is suing Stewart on four claims: wrongful death, terror pain and suffering prior to death, intentional/reckless conduct and gross negligence. Stewart has asked for the judge to rule in his favor on all counts except for intentional/reckless conduct, which would have to be determined by a jury. The judge, David Hurd, will take into account facts that he views are not in dispute and will decide if the law favors Stewart.
What is Stewart's main argument?
Stewart claims that waivers signed by Kevin Ward Jr. as a driver, and Ward's father, as his car owner, with Empire Super Sprints and the race track prohibit the Wards from suing for wrongful death and gross negligence because those waivers state they release other competitors from liability. He also argues that a race-car driver assumes an inherent risk when competing and therefore he cannot be held liable.
EDITOR'S PICKS
Stewart wants some lawsuit claims dismissed
Tony Stewart filed a motion Tuesday asking a federal judge to dismiss many claims the parents of Kevin Ward Jr. brought in a wrongful death lawsuit they filed against the driver.
Ward family responds to Stewart legal motion
The parents of Kevin Ward Jr. alleged in court documents filed Tuesday that Tony Stewart could have avoided hitting their son had Stewart just reacted as the six drivers in front of him did.
Why wouldn't waivers be applicable?
The Ward family questions whether Stewart actually signed a waiver, argues that Stewart never received an ESS membership card and the track waiver Stewart signed was different than the one the Wards signed. The Wards also argue that the waivers are not applicable to a gross negligence claim.
What is "terror pain" and why is that important?
In New York, families of victims cannot get damages for their pain and suffering, only for the victims' pain and suffering. Some of the biggest financial awards come from their loved one suffering from pre-impact terror -- think of looking up and seeing something falling on you.
Did Ward suffer such fear of pending death?
Stewart argues any experienced driver who would walk on to a hot race track and approach race cars is showing no fear because the driver knows what could happen. Stewart's toxicology expert reported that Ward had enough marijuana in his system to be impaired, which would mean more impulsive behavior and less inhibition. Because Ward was wearing a helmet, Stewart argues, there is no way to prove he had any terror. The Ward family's crash reconstruction experts determined that Ward's raising his arms just prior to contact with Stewart's car indicates he was making a desperate move to scramble away and therefore had that terror.
Did Ward suffer physical pain prior to death?
Stewart says no, using the testimony of first responders who said he had no pulse and was unresponsive. The death certificate says the approximate interval between onset of injury and death was "seconds." The Ward family argues that because he jumped and was hit first in the leg by the wheel of Stewart's car (suffering a broken leg) that he suffered that pain prior to being hit again (Ward suffered a lacerated aorta and transected spinal cord). The Ward family also argues that because Stewart claims that the family can't prove pre-impact terror because Ward's helmet obscured any facial expressions, that the same argument means that first responders couldn't determine his level of consciousness when they first got to him.
When will the judge make a decision?
The judge could make a decision from the bench at the end of the hearing. More likely, he will make it in the weeks following. He has had plenty of time to read the motions -- they were filed in March and April as the hearing was originally scheduled for April 28 but was postponed as mediation and settlement talks continued. It was then set for June 23 but canceled by Hurd, who initially decided to rule solely on the written arguments. The Sept. 8 hearing was postponed because the Wards' lawyers are from Houston and were impacted by Hurricane Harvey.
Can the decision be appealed?
Not before a trial. Even if Stewart wins on all his arguments, the case will continue toward trial because only a jury can determine if Stewart acted recklessly. Decisions in the case cannot be appealed until all the issues are adjudicated in U.S. district court.
What's next and when is the trial?
Good question as no date has been set for trial. Any motions challenging evidence and expert testimony are due next Tuesday. Once there is a ruling on summary judgment, it would give both sides a better idea of just how much in damages could be at stake in trial and therefore give more incentive toward settling the case. Stewart previously dropped an appeal to a court ruling that he wasn't covered by his insurance policy, so he possibly is not covered by any insurance, which could impact his decision on whether to settle.
Friday hearing on Ward court case.......
-
Annalee
- Colossal Race Fan
- Posts: 8412
- Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2016 5:26 pm
- Location: Home of NASCAR
- Has thanked: 219 times
- Been thanked: 437 times
Re: Friday hearing on Ward court case.......
Here are today's proceedings, no answer .....
UTICA, N.Y. -- The question of whether the inherent risk Kevin Ward Jr. took in competing in a sprint car race included that of being hit by Tony Stewart's car, while Ward walked on the track, was a central issue during an hour-long hearing in federal court Friday.
EDITOR'S PICKS
Tony Stewart's next court hearing in Kevin Ward Jr. case set for Friday
A federal judge will listen to arguments on key issues during a summary judgment hearing Friday as the parents of Kevin Ward Jr. continue their suit against Tony Stewart for the death of their son on a race track in New York in 2014.
The federal lawsuit, in which the Ward family contends Stewart was negligent and reckless in how he handled his sprint car, was filed in August 2015, about a year after the Aug. 9, 2014, incident in an Empire Super Sprints race at Canandaigua (New York) Motorsports Park.
A grand jury didn't indict Stewart, clearing him from any criminal charges, but Ward's parents say Stewart was trying to intimidate their 20-year-old son by swerving at him as he had walked onto the track after a crash to express his displeasure with the three-time NASCAR Cup champion.
Stewart has said he did not see Ward until the final moments, that he didn't know who it was on the track and that he hit the throttle as he attempted to swerve away from him.
Ward's parents as well as seven people wearing clothes featuring Ward's car and number sat on one side of the courtroom while Stewart sat on the opposite side.
"We all wish things ended differently. ... It was a tragic accident and nothing more," Stewart's attorney Angela Krahulik said in the courtroom.
The hearing Friday was originally scheduled in April but had been postponed three times for various reasons. District Judge David Hurd said he would rule in a few weeks "at best" and would be writing a lengthy decision.
Stewart has asked the judge to throw out three of the four claims against him before the case proceeds to trial. He argued in his filings that claims for wrongful death and gross negligence should be dismissed because Ward Jr. and his father (as the car owner) signed waivers that Stewart says prohibit such legal claims and because race car drivers know the inherent risk of the activity.
As far as a claim for Ward's pain and suffering and pre-impact terror, Stewart argued that the assertion is meritless because Ward died instantly and because his actions, including toxicology results that indicated Ward had consumed marijuana within five hours of the event, showed he had no fear preceding his death.
If Stewart is successful in his motion, the only claim a jury would decide would be for intentional/reckless conduct, something the judge cannot determine on his own.
One of the main issues throughout the hearing was whether Ward was a professional driver or raced more recreationally, which could determine which statutes apply and whether the releases are enforceable.
The other issue was that of inherent risk. Because emergency personnel are on the track and drivers often get out of their cars after a crash, Ward's attorney Ben Major argued, a driver should not expect to get hit by another car.
"All drivers know to expect pedestrians on the track [under caution]," Major told the court, adding that this is more of an issue for a jury to decide in trial rather than a judge in the earlier summary judgment phase.
That argument of whether these issues should go to a jury extended to whether Ward suffered any pre-impact terror or pain and suffering.
The judge questioned Krahulik on why he should decide whether Ward suffered pain and pre-impact terror because a jury could watch the video and make that determination themselves. Krahulik said the evidence showed he had no terror and that the death certificate said Ward died within seconds.
Crash analyses filed by both parties show different views of the accident. The Wards' crash reconstruction analysis indicated that Ward "braced himself for the severe impact and even made a desperate -- yet futile -- attempt to scramble out of the path" of Stewart's car.
The Ward family also argues that Ward suffered pain and suffering because the first injury he suffered was a broken leg moments before suffering a torn aorta and a transected spinal cord.
"He did know at the time he was going to get hit ... [and] he was feeling pain before he passed away," Major said.
Hurd's ruling could affect the direction of settlement negotiations, which have been ongoing for several months.
Stewart, and not his insurance company, might be personally responsible for any settlement. Hurd ruled last year that Axis Insurance Company was not responsible for defending Stewart and paying any settlements or judgments because the Empire Super Sprints was not among the series listed as being covered in his policy.
After initially appealing the ruling on the insurance policy, Stewart dropped the appeal. It is unclear whether there was any settlement or whether Stewart had any additional insurance policies that would cover the Ward family claims.
Attorneys declined comment as they left the courthouse.
UTICA, N.Y. -- The question of whether the inherent risk Kevin Ward Jr. took in competing in a sprint car race included that of being hit by Tony Stewart's car, while Ward walked on the track, was a central issue during an hour-long hearing in federal court Friday.
EDITOR'S PICKS
Tony Stewart's next court hearing in Kevin Ward Jr. case set for Friday
A federal judge will listen to arguments on key issues during a summary judgment hearing Friday as the parents of Kevin Ward Jr. continue their suit against Tony Stewart for the death of their son on a race track in New York in 2014.
The federal lawsuit, in which the Ward family contends Stewart was negligent and reckless in how he handled his sprint car, was filed in August 2015, about a year after the Aug. 9, 2014, incident in an Empire Super Sprints race at Canandaigua (New York) Motorsports Park.
A grand jury didn't indict Stewart, clearing him from any criminal charges, but Ward's parents say Stewart was trying to intimidate their 20-year-old son by swerving at him as he had walked onto the track after a crash to express his displeasure with the three-time NASCAR Cup champion.
Stewart has said he did not see Ward until the final moments, that he didn't know who it was on the track and that he hit the throttle as he attempted to swerve away from him.
Ward's parents as well as seven people wearing clothes featuring Ward's car and number sat on one side of the courtroom while Stewart sat on the opposite side.
"We all wish things ended differently. ... It was a tragic accident and nothing more," Stewart's attorney Angela Krahulik said in the courtroom.
The hearing Friday was originally scheduled in April but had been postponed three times for various reasons. District Judge David Hurd said he would rule in a few weeks "at best" and would be writing a lengthy decision.
Stewart has asked the judge to throw out three of the four claims against him before the case proceeds to trial. He argued in his filings that claims for wrongful death and gross negligence should be dismissed because Ward Jr. and his father (as the car owner) signed waivers that Stewart says prohibit such legal claims and because race car drivers know the inherent risk of the activity.
As far as a claim for Ward's pain and suffering and pre-impact terror, Stewart argued that the assertion is meritless because Ward died instantly and because his actions, including toxicology results that indicated Ward had consumed marijuana within five hours of the event, showed he had no fear preceding his death.
If Stewart is successful in his motion, the only claim a jury would decide would be for intentional/reckless conduct, something the judge cannot determine on his own.
One of the main issues throughout the hearing was whether Ward was a professional driver or raced more recreationally, which could determine which statutes apply and whether the releases are enforceable.
The other issue was that of inherent risk. Because emergency personnel are on the track and drivers often get out of their cars after a crash, Ward's attorney Ben Major argued, a driver should not expect to get hit by another car.
"All drivers know to expect pedestrians on the track [under caution]," Major told the court, adding that this is more of an issue for a jury to decide in trial rather than a judge in the earlier summary judgment phase.
That argument of whether these issues should go to a jury extended to whether Ward suffered any pre-impact terror or pain and suffering.
The judge questioned Krahulik on why he should decide whether Ward suffered pain and pre-impact terror because a jury could watch the video and make that determination themselves. Krahulik said the evidence showed he had no terror and that the death certificate said Ward died within seconds.
Crash analyses filed by both parties show different views of the accident. The Wards' crash reconstruction analysis indicated that Ward "braced himself for the severe impact and even made a desperate -- yet futile -- attempt to scramble out of the path" of Stewart's car.
The Ward family also argues that Ward suffered pain and suffering because the first injury he suffered was a broken leg moments before suffering a torn aorta and a transected spinal cord.
"He did know at the time he was going to get hit ... [and] he was feeling pain before he passed away," Major said.
Hurd's ruling could affect the direction of settlement negotiations, which have been ongoing for several months.
Stewart, and not his insurance company, might be personally responsible for any settlement. Hurd ruled last year that Axis Insurance Company was not responsible for defending Stewart and paying any settlements or judgments because the Empire Super Sprints was not among the series listed as being covered in his policy.
After initially appealing the ruling on the insurance policy, Stewart dropped the appeal. It is unclear whether there was any settlement or whether Stewart had any additional insurance policies that would cover the Ward family claims.
Attorneys declined comment as they left the courthouse.
