All - I've read the full complaint now, and this is a breakdown of the Willock suit: the parties, the claims, etc. I'll try to answer some questions if you have them.
Caveats:
* Please keep the "but I hate lawsuits, we're so litigious!" stuff elsewhere. This thread is for educating folks on the claims made and the relative chance of success.
* This is not going to be comprehensive. I don't know all the facts. I'm assuming the facts of the complaint are true (with some exceptions I'll note below). I'm not assuming any facts that aren't in the public record (like "DW knew she was drunk!" or "DW encouraged her to race!).
Analysis:
Plaintiff
There are two plaintiffs: Dave Willock and the estate of Devin Willock. Dave has claims as his father (for example, funeral costs, etc,.), which we call "survivor claims" and the estate has claims for things like pain and suffering, etc. Mom is not a party, but she could join (or she may end up being appointed administrator of the estate and becoming a party that way).
Defendants
UGA
Chandler Lecroy's estate
Anna Courson
Logan Reed
Coach Gantt
Breadman Jalen, LLC
Sarchione Auto
Jalen Carter
Toppers
Peterson Properties
Venue
This case was filed in Gwinnett County as it appears that is where Chandler's estate's administrator lives.
Claims
The claim against Lecroy is pretty straightforward. It's that she caused the accident which led to DW's death.
The claim against Sarchione can be best described as negligent entrustment of the vehicle to Jalen due to his history of speeding. Also, Carter's license was suspended in November 2022 and remained suspended at the time of the accident.
The claim against Toppers/Peterson Properties is that Toppers knew or should have known that Lecroy was intoxicated, but it continued to serve her alcohol.
The claim against Carter is that he recklessly endangered Willock's life by speeding (in tandem) with Lecroy.
UGAA (along with Reed, Courson & Gantt) - negligent supervision and entrustment. Basically, UGAA knew of Lecroy's history of speeding. Further, UGA knew that the recruiting coordinators would have the rental cars all weekend and that they would be at events where alcohol was consumed (and sometimes even provided by UGAA).
Analysis
The strongest claim is obviously against Chandler Lecroy's estate itself; however, that's the least valuable claim. The claim against Carter also has merit as Carter acted in tandem with Lecroy to race. They could be found jointly and severally liable for the death here (which really means that Carter would owe for the whole thing as I doubt Lecroy's estate has many assets). The Sarchione claims feel less viable, IMO, because it is unclear what they knew or should have known re: Carter's history of getting tickets and his license being suspended.
The Toppers claim is unclear to me. Lecroy was well over the legal limit, but it is unclear whether Toppers had evidence that she was intoxicated.
I think the claims against UGAA are the ones of most interest here. I will say that the facts that have been pleaded, if true, are not good for UGAA. Is it enough for liability? I'm not sure. It is probably enough to at least get past summary judgment.
The plaintiffs have excellent counsel here - including a former judge who is well respected in the legal community. I suspect that several of the defendants will file motions to dismiss with their answers. This case is not likely to be resolved for quite some time - maybe even 2025 - unless people start ponying up money.
If you've got questions (and don't ask me to assume any facts beyond very mild extrapolations), I'll be happy to try to answer them.
Caveats:
* Please keep the "but I hate lawsuits, we're so litigious!" stuff elsewhere. This thread is for educating folks on the claims made and the relative chance of success.
* This is not going to be comprehensive. I don't know all the facts. I'm assuming the facts of the complaint are true (with some exceptions I'll note below). I'm not assuming any facts that aren't in the public record (like "DW knew she was drunk!" or "DW encouraged her to race!).
Analysis:
Plaintiff
There are two plaintiffs: Dave Willock and the estate of Devin Willock. Dave has claims as his father (for example, funeral costs, etc,.), which we call "survivor claims" and the estate has claims for things like pain and suffering, etc. Mom is not a party, but she could join (or she may end up being appointed administrator of the estate and becoming a party that way).
Defendants
UGA
Chandler Lecroy's estate
Anna Courson
Logan Reed
Coach Gantt
Breadman Jalen, LLC
Sarchione Auto
Jalen Carter
Toppers
Peterson Properties
Venue
This case was filed in Gwinnett County as it appears that is where Chandler's estate's administrator lives.
Claims
The claim against Lecroy is pretty straightforward. It's that she caused the accident which led to DW's death.
The claim against Sarchione can be best described as negligent entrustment of the vehicle to Jalen due to his history of speeding. Also, Carter's license was suspended in November 2022 and remained suspended at the time of the accident.
The claim against Toppers/Peterson Properties is that Toppers knew or should have known that Lecroy was intoxicated, but it continued to serve her alcohol.
The claim against Carter is that he recklessly endangered Willock's life by speeding (in tandem) with Lecroy.
UGAA (along with Reed, Courson & Gantt) - negligent supervision and entrustment. Basically, UGAA knew of Lecroy's history of speeding. Further, UGA knew that the recruiting coordinators would have the rental cars all weekend and that they would be at events where alcohol was consumed (and sometimes even provided by UGAA).
Analysis
The strongest claim is obviously against Chandler Lecroy's estate itself; however, that's the least valuable claim. The claim against Carter also has merit as Carter acted in tandem with Lecroy to race. They could be found jointly and severally liable for the death here (which really means that Carter would owe for the whole thing as I doubt Lecroy's estate has many assets). The Sarchione claims feel less viable, IMO, because it is unclear what they knew or should have known re: Carter's history of getting tickets and his license being suspended.
The Toppers claim is unclear to me. Lecroy was well over the legal limit, but it is unclear whether Toppers had evidence that she was intoxicated.
I think the claims against UGAA are the ones of most interest here. I will say that the facts that have been pleaded, if true, are not good for UGAA. Is it enough for liability? I'm not sure. It is probably enough to at least get past summary judgment.
The plaintiffs have excellent counsel here - including a former judge who is well respected in the legal community. I suspect that several of the defendants will file motions to dismiss with their answers. This case is not likely to be resolved for quite some time - maybe even 2025 - unless people start ponying up money.
If you've got questions (and don't ask me to assume any facts beyond very mild extrapolations), I'll be happy to try to answer them.
