...you end up with some kind of cigarette smoke related disease in the future, if you haven't smoked once in your life? I mean like people that will light up a cigarette beside you at a bus stop, mall entrance, park bench, etc. Could you also sue them now for endangerment?
2007-02-08 11:22:19 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I know you could always move away from people that light up beside you, I do, but by the time you notice they are smoking you are already breathing the smoke.
2007-02-08 11:23:37 · update #1
why does everyone look for an excuse to sue everyone? life is full of risks, man..deal with it
2007-02-08 11:25:48 · answer #1 · answered by kapute2 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think so, not unless you are a minor and have no free will, because wether or not you were there first, you have the power to walk away from the situation and ultimately you decide to put up with it by staying. If you know the risks then you are just as much at fault for staying in the situation that you know can be hazardous to your health. You would have more credit to your case if you were in an enclosed space. I don't think someone lighting up beside you at a bus stop in the open air is anymore dangerous than living near a refinery, probably less. Do you think you could sue Ford or Chevy or any other automobile maker for putting out fumes into the air in every city in America? What if you develped cancer but it was from waiting for the bus everyday and breathing the fumes as you waited to board the bus?
2007-02-08 11:32:31 · answer #2 · answered by lisa b 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Perhaps this is one of the reasons why California is passing so many no smoking laws. We don't need more lawsuits to tie up our court system! I doubt you would win your suit, but it would certainly get the issue some attention in the media! To stay safe, you should learn how to gauge the wind before you sit on a bench! California has a law that makes it illegal to smoke within 25 feet of a public park & most people don't know because the signs haven't been posted yet!
2007-02-08 11:32:47 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think you should think of something better to sue for. how would you prove which smoker caused your disease? and they could argue that you couldnt possibly have pictures and names of every single person whose smoke you've breathed.
if someone lights up near you in the examples you gave, and you moved away, i doubt that will have too much effect on your health really. if your parent was smoking in the car or house , then that might be a better case.
2007-02-08 11:34:51 · answer #4 · answered by zimba 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, because there is a problem of causation. All of them exposed you to smoke, but not all of them caused your disease.
Courts are very hesitant to impose liability in these kinds of cases. Summers v. Tice is an example where they did impose liability, but that is distinguished from this case because A) There were only two negligent actors involved, and B) Both were negligent, the only issue was actual causation.
In your example, there may be dozens, if not hundreds of actors involved, and very few of them might be said to be negligent.
There are also the market-share liability cases (DES) and Ybarra, but those cases are either not followed in most jurisdictions (Ybarra) or are severely limited to a special factual situation (DES).
2007-02-08 11:30:10 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I dont know wether you could sue, but it might belt some sence into the inconsiderate smokers. I know some smokers will move away from ppl to smoke, but the majority dont.. Good luck with this.
2007-02-08 11:31:43 · answer #6 · answered by thunderbox666 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
MIght be a bit difficult to prove causation, but we definitely need more lawsuits in our courts, there just aren't enough.
2007-02-08 11:26:24 · answer #7 · answered by Lt. Dan reborn 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋