Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Federal court ruling in KBR case shields contractors from some wartime lawsuits

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
sabra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-07-09 12:15 PM
Original message
Federal court ruling in KBR case shields contractors from some wartime lawsuits
Source: southern studies

A federal appeals court ruling in a lawsuit involving a severely brain-damaged U.S. soldier will make it more difficult to sue military contractors for actions on the battlefield.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals handed down its ruling last week in Carmichael vs. KBR, a civil suit brought by the wife of a soldier who received a profound brain injury in a wreck during a fuel convoy in Iraq. The appellate court held that the woman cannot sue KBR, the Houston-based civilian contractor that was delivering the fuel.

Sgt. Keith Carmichael was a so-called "shooter" riding in a tanker truck operated by KBR during a 2004 convoy north of Baghdad, an area well-known for attacks on U.S. forces as well as private contractors. When the driver lost control of the vehicle while rounding a curve, Carmichael was thrown from and pinned beneath the truck. The severe injuries he suffered left him in a permanent vegetative state.

Annette Carmichael of Atlanta sued KBR along with its former parent company, Halliburton, and the truck driver in Georgia state court in 2006. KBR got the lawsuit moved to federal court in Atlanta and then asked for dismissal, arguing that the military was in charge of the convoy.


Read more: http://www.southernstudies.org/2009/07/federal-court-ruling-in-kbr-case-shields-contractors-from-some-wartime-lawsuits.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-07-09 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
1. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pleah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-07-09 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
2. K:&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snappyturtle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-07-09 12:56 PM
Response to Original message
3. K&R :( nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-07-09 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
4. disgusting
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vidar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-07-09 01:16 PM
Response to Original message
5. What garbage!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dipsydoodle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-07-09 01:54 PM
Response to Original message
6. K & R #9
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elleng Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-07-09 02:01 PM
Response to Original message
7. Like it or not, this is an example of the hard decisions courts must make.
The decision itself is provided in pdf format.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
winyanstaz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-07-09 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. When the courts forget about compassion and people
then true justice flies out the window.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elleng Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-07-09 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. You've got to read the decision
and try to understand the relevant issues. This is a court of appeals; 'compassion and people' are not its job; the law is. Congress makes the laws.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
winyanstaz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-07-09 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. I have read it, I understand the issues, and it still sucks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wednesdays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-07-09 08:06 PM
Response to Original message
11. K&R
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-08-09 08:15 AM
Response to Original message
12. Courts must follow the law. Blame for the outcome of this case belongs on the other two branches.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-08-09 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. OK, "Courts must follow the law" but juries don't. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 03:29 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC