I read this yesterday and had the exact same thought. That amount of money seemed like peanuts for the life altering injuries she sustained.

---

**********************
Harry: "I expected the Rocky Mountains to be a little rockier than this."
Loyd: "I was thinking the same thing. That John Denver's full of shit, man."

Two things that might be contradictory:
1- Isn't there some assumption of risk when you are a stuntman?
2- Eliza Dushku just got $9.5 million in her settlement with CBS. She still has both arms, and her face is just fine.

---

"I keep hoping for you to use your superior intellect to be less insufferable. Sadly, you continue to disappoint." - gofigure

Can't really tell based upon the known facts provided.

It does sound low for the amount of damages so if this is just the petition it leads to the assumption the plaintiff lawyers are aware there is some contrib on the Plaintiff. If they are required to plead the damages in the original petition I would have expected more based upon those injuries.

A 5-8 million dollar demand would seem about right depending on jurisdiction, assuming good liability facts.

1. Yes. But it sounds like they were negligent in not moving the crane during the stunt. You cannot assume the risk of negligence.

2. I can see her getting a lot more because she is an actress and not a stunt woman. But, yeah, that sounds a lot more reasonable. I would expect the stunt woman to ask for $20m minimum. Unless she is limited my UK law.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Something doesn’t add up. Maybe she suing each of them for 2.2?

---

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace." Jimi Hendrix

That is a nasty story, and value does seem low.



<<But it sounds like they were negligent in not moving the crane during the stunt.>>

Maybe you've read more about this case than I have - the article you linked is the first time I've heard about it and all I know about it. But, the article just says something "went wrong" and there was a collision with equipment that she was intentionally driving towards at speed. Maybe the SUV driver or crane operator was negligent (I'm sure that's her claim), but maybe bad things just happen when you're doing high speed stunts...


<<You cannot assume the risk of negligence.>>

Do you know if that's true only in a personal injury context? I had a long, frustrating conversation with counsel for a Big 4 accounting firm years ago, in which they insisted that my client (which was retaining the accounting firm) not only assume risk of the accounting firm's negligence, but actually indemnify them against their own negligence. Still pisses me off that I was ultimately instructed to let that point go.

<<I can see her getting a lot more because she is an actress and not a stunt woman.>>

One of the Instagram posts in the article shows has her hashtagging "thank goodness I'm not modelling anymore". This kind of injury would seem to put the kibosh on her modeling income....

If you Google her name, you can find a couple more articles, but, not many more details. The camera was on a crane on a vehicle. When she came around the corner, the camera was supposed to pull up. It did not pull up on time. The camera operator admitted the camera did not pull up on cue, but, claims the accident could have been avoided if she hit her brakes.



I was referring to the personal injury context and it depends on the jurisdiction. In many cases, you can waive liability for simple negligence, but, not gross negligence. There are a ton of caveats and the cases are highly fact specific. Liability waivers serve a purpose, but, rarely are they worth the paper on which they are written.

Of course, this is a little different and assumption of the risk comes into play. But, the film crew is held to a fairly high standard of safety. Having a camera right at head height for a stunt with a speeding cycle is going to be pretty hard to justify. But, again, I am just going off the few articles I read.


It said she was also a professional kick boxer. I find it hard to believe she isn't losing more income than she has claimed.

I looked briefly to see if I could find any limits on claims that would be in play. I found nothing. Admittedly, I only skimmed for information.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Word. That’s what I was taught as a baby lawyer in the business contract negotiations - you can fight over who takes the risk in a contract over a party’s simple negligence, but gross negligence and up you can’t dish off on the counterparty. And In personal injury stuff, like a gym contract or a waiver on a rafting trip, that waiver is probably most useful as toilet paper :)

For someone who got as twisted up as a pretzel as she did, she seems to have a pretty healthy outlook on life.

There have been quite big personal I jury awards in the UK. 10-20m in medical malpractice cases.

No idea what's going on here but I'd guess she is well represented so will be interesting to see where it goes