Though the concrete was in a state of disrepair, what percentage of responsibility is Reggie Bush’s in this matter?  What did he do that caused his injuries?  Was he actually paying attention?  Was he trying to do something else as he was back there that distracted him?  Did he assume the risk of responsibility by being on that area and where he fell?

The other practical problem is that if the case were to be heard in St. Louis, how sympathetic do you think he will be in front of a St. Louis jury?  He is on the other team.  In addition to that, everyone knows he is a multi-millionaire.  So how likely is it that a jury would give more money to someone who is already worth tens of millions?

This is a real, practical problem that illustrates the issues regarding slip and fall cases.  Not only in Missouri but in Pittsburgh, Altoona, Butler and all the surrounding areas in western Pennsylvania.  Juries are not, generally speaking, too sympathetic to a person who is injured on someone else’s property when they were not really paying attention.  There is also the legal standard of assuming the risk of injury for being where he was at the time.

My guess is that this matter at some point will resolve itself by way of a settlement.  The reason for this belief is that the defendants are not likely to want to risk going in front of a jury and getting a huge verdict against them, if the liability part of the case can be proven.  By the same token, the settlement amount, if it comes, is likely to be very low compared to what it would be if there wasn’t the issue of comparative negligence on Mr. Bush’s part.  I don’t know this for sure.  It is just my speculation.  However, it seems likely that there are going to be a lot of hurdles that Mr. Bush is going to have to overcome in order to prevail in this case.

I wish him the best, but that is the way I view it.  Pittsburg wrongful death, auto accident and slip and fall attorney Bernie Tully welcomes any inquiries regarding these types of injury cases.  We will give you an honest assessment as to what we think about your case if you call us and we go over it together.  Of course, we do it on a contingency fee base.  In plain English this means that if there is no recovery you don’t owe us any money.

I have one last question for you.  Suppose we have the same situation and a Pittsburgh Steeler superstar was injured.  Say Heath Miller.  If that case were heard in Pittsburgh by a jury, under the same set of facts of the case, I think the defendant’s insurance company would have to get out it’s checkbook and write a really big check.  Why?  Because Heath Miller is loved by Pittsburgh fans.  It is likely that under that example that some or most of the people on the jury would be on his side. Do you see the practice differences between the 2 situations?  Legally they are the same facts, but what a different result it would likely be.

Thanks for reading.

Bernie the attorney