1. Did the guy sustain injuries? Obviously.
2. Should the defendant have known about the danger? Jury said yes. It was reasonable to expect that the supervisors during inspections should have noticed the exposed toggle switch on the table saw and known about the dangers.
3. Did the defendant use a reasonable amount of care to prevent the danger on the property? Jury said no. The supervisors didn’t have knowledge of working table saws. But if they were responsible for safety it is reasonable to expect them to gain that knowledge.
4. Did this failure to use reasonable care cause the injuries? Jury said yes. The accident could have been easily prevented by reasonable knowledge of safety standards when it comes to table saws..

So the verdict was in favor of the inmate. But there was a second part. Obviously they couldn’t place ALL the blame on the prison. A skilled carpenter working a table saw could have also prevented the injury by not standing so close to the switch with his fingers by the blades. So they also had to determine what percentage the prison was at fault vs the inmate. They decided the fault was 50/50 and thus the damages awarded were half of the number they came up with which amounted to around 82 grand. It is something. But you still have to feel bad for the guy. HIs days of being a carpenter are over. Not to mention the pains he is likely to have for the rest of his life. Anyway, interesting week for Todd.

In unrelated news, Todd just finished four days of jury duty. The case was about an inmate, formerly a carpenter, who was hired to work in the prison workshop. He was adjusting some wood on an old table saw and accidentally bumped a toggle switch that turned the saw on and cut a few fingers off. So he was suing the company that owned the prison for liability due to an unsafe work environment. He stated that it was the job of the supervisors to inspect the equipment for safely issues. Just given that very limited information, what do you think the outcome was?

Here are the questions they had to answer before delivering a verdict:

1. Did the plaintiff (the inmate) suffer from injuries, damages, or losses. (Easy enough, he just showed them his hand. I guess some of the jurors said they couldn’t sleep after seeing it).

2. Did the defendant (the prison) have knowledge, or should they have had knowledge about the danger on the property?

3. Did the defendant (the prison) use reasonable care in preventing the danger on the property?

4. Did the defendant’s failure to use reasonable care cause the inmates injuries?

[This reminds me of the homework I had in my Business Law class in college. Read a case, answer questions, deliver our verdict, and find out the next day what the actual outcome was. So… guess.]

LANDSCAPE: Path around the house
The flagstone path on the North side is going back in. The top will have the same pieces as the beautiful path my friends built for me before but it will now be strengthened and reinforced. Same path, better structure and foundation. An upgraded version without teetering pieces and weeds in the cracks.

On the south side there was no path. But there will be.

TRAINING: Finally getting back to training more consistently. Same training as before (which means never a dull moment with CrossFit) but building myself up slowly this time so I won’t come apart at the cracks. Same path, better structure and foundation. An upgraded version of the same me. My diet is also still in order. Last I made these fruited chicken thighs off the Paleo Meal Plan website. Mmmm.

Fruited Chicken Thighs

My issue is always consistency. One minute I am super-strict and the next I am in line at Smashburger. So far it has been 15 days since I last stuffed my face with fast food and Dairy Queen… and counting. But I haven’t been militant. I eat when I feel hungry, enjoy some chips and salsa from time to time, and in fact have eaten a little bit of chocolate every single day.