Without adding anything further-
**Edited to add the full article below including a link**
Feel free to comment as you will. Makes you wonder about people sometimes huh?
For the record- I travel this road twice daily in my commute and often on the weekends as well. Although the posted speed limit is 50mph, people average 65-70mph. Also as a friend of mine familiar with the area said- this is a long, flat, straight stretch of road. No trees, no hills, no dips, no curves.
This is the article as found on AZCentral.com from October 10, 2012.
$165 million lawsuit
pending in crash that paralyzed Gilbert boy
Host of defendants in Ironwood Drive accident
9 comments by Luci Scott - Oct. 10, 2012
10:10 AM
The Republic | azcentral.com
Who
is at fault? That's the big question lingering from a horrific car crash that
left a 9-year-old Gilbert boy paralyzed from the neck down.The Republic | azcentral.com
The
boy's father, Brandon Ackert Sr. of Gilbert, is preparing to sue for $165
million over the accident, and the defendants include a number of Southeast
Valley and other government entities.
On
March 27, Lisa Ackert, a 911 operator for Phoenix and the boy's mother, was
northbound on Ironwood Drive, a busy four-lane highway, about 2 miles north of
Germann Road.
Ahead
of her, a Dodge Ram pickup pulling a horse trailer had slowed or stopped in the
fast lane to turn left across the dirt median. The pickup's driver, Joseph
Curtis Kimball, was headed for a road that leads to a corral and open desert.
Lisa
Ackert's Chevy Malibu struck the rear of the horse trailer.
She
was injured, as were her sons Brandon Jr., 7, who was in the backseat and
wearing his seat belt, and Andrew, then 9, who was in the front seat and not
wearing a seat belt, according to a notice of claim filed by Brandon Sr. and
his sons. A notice of claim is a precursor to a lawsuit.
Andrew,
who used to love playing sports, is now 10 and was left a quadriplegic who
needs a ventilator to breathe.
The
notice of claim says the accident was caused by "negligent design and
maintenance" of Ironwood Drive.
The
median contains shrubs and brush, and it is filled with gravel and dirt to
allow motorists to cross. The northbound and southbound lanes closest to the
median are marked with a solid yellow line on the left, a symbol indicating
motorists should not cross.
It's
unclear which town the accident occurred in and which governmental agency is
responsible for Ironwood's design and maintenance, so the notice was sent to
the state, Pinal and Maricopa counties, the towns of Apache Junction and Queen
Creek and the unincorporated area of San Tan Valley.
"Determining
who is responsible for Ironwood Drive through this area has been a wild goose
chase," attorney Robert K. Lewis said in a news release. "Poor road
design has left this highway in such an ultra-hazardous condition that people
stop in the high-speed lane to turn left across an unimproved median. No one
will take responsibility."
Ironwood
Drive crosses through Maricopa and Pinal counties, Apache Junction, Queen Creek
and the unincorporated community of San Tan Valley. The highway borders
property maintained by the state Land Department, Arizona Game and Fish
Department and the state Department of Transportation. The governmental
agencies are collectively referred to in the notice as the "public
entities."
"It
is clear that the public entities either filled in the dirt median permitting
motor vehicles to cross in a dangerous fashion or permitted a third party to fill
in the median," the notice says. "Either way, the public entities are
liable for causing this accident."
The
notice says Ironwood Drive was not designed within generally accepted
engineering standards and "does not provide adequate warning of a dangerous
condition."
Attorney
Lewis' law firm, representing Brandon Ackert Sr. and his sons, has repeatedly
asked for a police report, but the lawyer said it has not been released by the
Pinal County Sheriff's Office, which, according to the notice of claim, has
said that the Pinal County Attorney's Office is looking at the report.
The
Sheriff's Office told The Republic the report is not available because
the accident is still under active investigation.
Since
the accident, Andrew's medical bills have totaled more than $2 million, and the
notice says his medical bills will likely amount to $1.4 million a year. The
notice asks for a settlement of $159 million for Andrew.
Brandon
Ackert Sr., a telecommunications sales representative, said the accident
"deprived Brandon of the love, companionship, comfort, society and
affection of Andrew Ackert," the notice says.
"Brandon
can no longer play sports with his son, go to games or even run or walk with
his son. Brandon will be by his son's bedside for the rest of his life, but the
quality of their relationship and the ability to share and live life together
was taken away from him," the claim adds.
"Although
Mr. Kimball and Ms. Ackert share some liability for causing the accident, the
public entities bear the brunt of the liability," the notice says,
charging the highway's design allows motorists to violate state law by
permitting them to cross a dirt median and two solid yellow lines.
There
is a left-hand turn lane a quarter mile to the north of the accident's location
where motorists can make a legal U-turn. At the point of the accident, Lewis
said, there is no left-turn lane, no stop sign, no traffic light and no easy
way to cross the median.
"Worst
of all, these conditions still exist today," he said. "There could be
another, similar crash waiting to happen, and nothing will improve until we
find out which jurisdiction is responsible for make it take
responsibility."
Read
more: http://www.azcentral.com/community/mesa/articles/20121004mesa-lawsuit-pending--crash-paralyzed-gilbert-boy.html?nclick_check=1#ixzz2AQnCEzFs
cannot see the article , but if it the same thing we were discussing the other night , I think you know my thoughts! Tragic , yes,but certainly the blame is not being placed as squarely as it needs to be
ReplyDeleteWow. Tragic yes but agree with fernvalley01. Blame is not being placed where it needs to be.
ReplyDeleteMay be out in left field here....but why was the 9 yr old in the front seat with no seatbelt on???
ReplyDeleteI'm way late in reading this as I just joined your blog, but it is my understanding #1 that if you hit the rear end of another vehicle, you are always the "at fault" driver. #2 if your child is injured because you did not take the time to assure that your child was safely secured in a seat belt, that is called Child Negligence and in AZ is a felony. I am very surprised that she was not charged.
ReplyDelete