Batchelder vs. Malibu case SEC filing

[justgary]

Then there was the time that my buddy was on a federal grand jury.  I reminded him several times that he needn't help indict that ham sandwich. 

He didn't tell me any specifics of their cases, but a few of them had the prosecutor dangling charges by a thread, like wanting to apply federal law because the bullets in the gun a dude stole were made somewhere else, and therefore he could claim "interstate commerce" and prosecute him on a list of charges. 

Either bring a guy up on real charges or let the state prosecute him.  I'm tired of hearing about the constitution getting stretched thinner and thinner.

[Baggerlance]

50 minutes ago, Bozboat said:

You would be amazed at how perceptive jurors can be. Maybe at some point you will embrace an opportunity to serve as a juror and begin to appreciate the process. 

We live in a imperfect world and s*** happens. Pi Lawyers base cases on an expectation of perfection and only get paid when the jury settles in their favor. Malibu did nothing malicious, but were penalized for not thinking through the millions of possibilities for injuries and designing safeguards up front. Juries with no personal context are "led" by the information that is presented in court. Defend it however you wish, but big money PI wins are the name of the legal game in my opinion. I'm a forgiving person so I'll disregard the personal insult.

[85 Barefoot]

14 hours ago, UWSkier said:

Let's say the kids were average of 50 lbs.  I have this model boat and there's no way I'm putting 200 lbs up there unless I'm idling in a no wake zone, and I'd rate my navigation abilities as expert level.

This is misuse of the boat, not a design issue.

BTW, 4 kids in bow, a driver... how many other passengers aboard?  That's 5 human bodies at least all in front of the dog house, with no mention of anyone on the observer seat which there almost certainly was.

Also, the capacity plate on this boat is 8 ppl.  Were they over that?

You're making the case!  If you know that putting a measly 200#s (an average adult) in the bow renders it unsafe for an EXPERT driver (as a former owner, I agree) then people who designed it know it (or they darn sure should have), and if they know it, then they have a responsibility to tell people who are not EXPERTS to not put 200 pounds up front.  It's not that complicated.  

 

[85 Barefoot]

10 hours ago, Baggerlance said:

We live in a imperfect world and s*** happens. Pi Lawyers base cases on an expectation of perfection and only get paid when the jury settles in their favor. Malibu did nothing malicious, but were penalized for not thinking through the millions of possibilities for injuries and designing safeguards up front. Juries with no personal context are "led" by the information that is presented in court. Defend it however you wish, but big money PI wins are the name of the legal game in my opinion. I'm a forgiving person so I'll disregard the personal insult.

"Millions of possibilities"?  Maybe there are, but using the BOW of a BOWRIDER is "possibility" #1.   It's obviously the reason they even created the model. 

As UW, a self-described "expert" already said, there is "no way" he would put 200#s in the bow of his Response LX.  Malibu didn't get "penalized for not thinking through the millions of possibilities for injuries".  They got popped because it is ludicrous to design and produce something, it get used precisely as intended, but not tell people (not all of whom are experts) that using it precisely as intended is actually quite dangerous.  Has they done that, Batchelder is almost certainly alive and Malibu would have no verdict to deal with.

[23LSVOwner]

With the thousands of these same models out there is seems like if this was a serious issue there would literally be hundreds of reports.

[justgary]

49 minutes ago, 85 Barefoot said:

"Millions of possibilities"?  Maybe there are, but using the BOW of a BOWRIDER is "possibility" #1.   It's obviously the reason they even created the model. 

As UW, a self-described "expert" already said, there is "no way" he would put 200#s in the bow of his Response LX.  Malibu didn't get "penalized for not thinking through the millions of possibilities for injuries".  They got popped because it is ludicrous to design and produce something, it get used precisely as intended, but not tell people (not all of whom are experts) that using it precisely as intended is actually quite dangerous.  Has they done that, Batchelder is almost certainly alive and Malibu would have no verdict to deal with.

Wow.  I have driven a 2004 RLXi with an adult male (maybe 185#) in the bow seat and not had any problems at all.  He is the owner of the boat, and I know that he has had two or more adults in the bow many times and not significantly dipped it.  I say significant because it is possible to get water on the bow light, but that doesn't mean you will get enough water in the boat to fill the front and wash cushions (or people) out.  Once that happens with a loaded bow, you quickly learn how to prevent it.

I still think that something else was in play in the case at hand.  The "going around in circles" part tells me that this was not just some completely innocent event at idle (they claimed 4-7 MPH) on calm water.  Blaming the manufacturer for poor driving skills is my issue with this case.

[85 Barefoot]

3 hours ago, justgary said:

Wow.  I have driven a 2004 RLXi with an adult male (maybe 185#) in the bow seat and not had any problems at all.  He is the owner of the boat, and I know that he has had two or more adults in the bow many times and not significantly dipped it.  I say significant because it is possible to get water on the bow light, but that doesn't mean you will get enough water in the boat to fill the front and wash cushions (or people) out.  Once that happens with a loaded bow, you quickly learn how to prevent it.

I still think that something else was in play in the case at hand.  The "going around in circles" part tells me that this was not just some completely innocent event at idle (they claimed 4-7 MPH) on calm water.  Blaming the manufacturer for poor driving skills is my issue with this case.

You don't get it.  The distinctions have been made in this thread but you just don't get it.  This is not just "any" open bow ski boat.  It is not comparable to a Response LXi (even though it can have dipping issues too). 

The fundamental issue is that the bow of a Response LX is literally a bowl.  Water cannot move to the stern like in a Response LXi, a Sunsetter, Sunsetter Lxi, etc.  When water goes in, it has nowhere to go (quickly).  Unlike other open bow, low-slung ski boats, the Response LX cannot "dip" the bow and power through like can be done on walk through designs.

Watch this video:

 

That boat didn't sink because the water taken in the bow could move astern and not create an unrecoverable bow down pitch.  This is a fundamentally different design than a Response LX, and which was precisely why the driver of the Batchelder boat (smartly) went in reverse.  Folks in this thread have criticized that move.  It literally could have saved the vessel.  Unfortunately, it was at a time that the 7 year old was under the prop.  In hindsight, sure, let the boat sink.  But the design caused the proclivity for an unrecoverable bow-swamp condition which was itself caused by bow weight for which you've already heard an "expert" say he would not even put 200 pounds in!

Again, I'm a former Response LX owner.  Also Lxis, and a slew of others.  I even currently have a Response.  The Response LX design is unique and for that matter, uniquely dangerous with the bow in use.  Believe me or not, it doesn't matter, but I don't think the armchair quarterbacks in this thread understand the unique circumstances the LX creates, which is precisely, and correctly in my view, why a jury concluded the uniqueness of this design should have generated a warning for windshield, like we have gotten for the last 10 years from Malibu.

Edited September 15, 2021 by 85 Barefoot

[Bozboat]

12 hours ago, Baggerlance said:

We live in a imperfect world and s*** happens. Pi Lawyers base cases on an expectation of perfection and only get paid when the jury settles in their favor. Malibu did nothing malicious, but were penalized for not thinking through the millions of possibilities for injuries and designing safeguards up front. Juries with no personal context are "led" by the information that is presented in court. Defend it however you wish, but big money PI wins are the name of the legal game in my opinion. I'm a forgiving person so I'll disregard the personal insult.

I am not here to insult or be insulted.  Bash lawyers if you want, but If your concern is that juries are being lead down a path, I would hope that you and @justgary might embrace the opportunity to participate on a jury.  Your participation could make a difference in the outcome.

[Surfbeast21]

So if someone is out in there 14’ aluminum boat with little outboard motor on it. And they dip the front or side and Someone falls out and gets hit with prop because driver panics.   No warning stickers where to sit people  in any aluminum boat that I have been in.  Does the aluminum boat company pay 200M at that point??

 

or are rednecks exempt from warnings and able to sit where they want, and take responsibility for their actions. 
 

 

 

 

[Surfbeast21]

12 hours ago, justgary said:

Then there was the time that my buddy was on a federal grand jury.  I reminded him several times that he needn't help indict that ham sandwich. 

He didn't tell me any specifics of their cases, but a few of them had the prosecutor dangling charges by a thread, like wanting to apply federal law because the bullets in the gun a dude stole were made somewhere else, and therefore he could claim "interstate commerce" and prosecute him on a list of charges. 

Either bring a guy up on real charges or let the state prosecute him.  I'm tired of hearing about the constitution getting stretched thinner and thinner.

Constitution?  never heard of it 🤣

[amartin]

2 hours ago, 85 Barefoot said:

You're making the case!  If you know that putting a measly 200#s (an average adult) in the bow renders it unsafe for an EXPERT driver (as a former owner, I agree) then people who designed it know it (or they darn sure should have), and if they know it, then they have a responsibility to tell people who are not EXPERTS to not put 200 pounds up front.  It's not that complicated.  

 

85 - you must be a lawyer.  I base this on two observations:  There is no one in the world as passionate about justifying the value that lawyers provide than lawyers themselves; and UW said that he considers himself an expert at navigation, not at judging where to put people in a boat.  I have been in 2 of the 4 "positons" in the courtroom - jury box and witness stand.  It always amazes me how well a good litigator can turn someone's words around to completely change their obvious intent.

For clarity, I am not attacking you or trying to insult you and I could very well be wrong about your profession.  I have some very good friends who are all kinds of attorneys and while I enjoy their company, I generally see things pretty differently than they do on alot of these types of issues - but isn't that what makes life interesting for us all!

[UWSkier]

1 hour ago, 85 Barefoot said:

You don't get it.  The distinctions have been made in this thread but you just don't get it.  This is not just "any" open bow ski boat.  It is not comparable to a Response LXi (even though it can have dipping issues too). 

The fundamental issue is that the bow of a Response LX is literally a bowl.  Water cannot move to the stern like in a Response LXi, a Sunsetter, Sunsetter Lxi, etc.  When water goes in, it has nowhere to go. Unlike other open bow, low-slung ski boats, the Response LX cannot "dip" the bow and power through like can be done on walk through designs.

Watch this video:

 

That boat didn't sink because the water taken in the bow could move astern and not create an unrecoverable bow down pitch.  This is a fundamentally different design than a Response LX, and which was precisely why the driver of the Batchelder boat (smartly) went in reverse.  Folks in this thread have criticized that move.  It literally could have saved the vessel.  Unfortunately, it was at a time that the 7 year old was under the prop.  In hindsight, sure, let the boat sink.  But the design caused the proclivity for an unrecoverable bow-swamp condition which was itself caused by bow weight for which you've already heard an "expert" say he would not even put 200 pounds in!

Again, I'm a former Response LX owner.  Also Lxis, and a slew of others.  I even currently have a Response.  The Response LX design is unique and for that matter, uniquely dangerous with the bow in use.  Believe me or not, it doesn't matter, but I don't think the armchair quarterbacks in this thread understand the unique circumstances the LX creates, which is precisely, and correctly in my view, why a jury concluded the uniqueness of this design should have generated a warning for windshield, like we have gotten for the last 10 years from Malibu.

It must have been a long time since you owned this boat because this is false.  If you get water in the bow of the Response LX, it will flow back the same as any other boat.  Most of it will pour out by the driver's footwell or the port gunnel.  The front is not a bowl.  It's open to the observer compartment and drivers footwell behind it.  I intentionally unblock this area in the hot summer months because as the driver, I like the airflow from the bow up through the driver's compartment.  In winter, I block it off.

[Steve B.]

In general, I think juries almost always get things right....based on and according to the evidence and instructions presented to them. 

As a juror, I may personally think Malibu has zero liability in an issue like this. That means nothing. A jurors only duty is to decide if a plaintiff or defendant has made their case, and then to follow the instructions the judge hands them. 

Thanks Ronnie and the other TMC admins for letting this run it's course.

Steve B.

 

[justgary]

3 minutes ago, UWSkier said:

It must have been a long time since you owned this boat because this is false.  If you get water in the bow of the Response LX, it will flow back the same as any other boat.  Most of it will pour out by the driver's footwell or the port gunnel.  The front is not a bowl.  It's open to the observer compartment and drivers footwell behind it.  I intentionally unblock this area in the hot summer months because as the driver, I like the airflow from the bow up through the driver's compartment.  In winter, I block it off.

Thank you for confirming that.  I had thought it was the case.

Also, I'm pretty sure that the 2000 RLX had foam in the floor, so the boat wasn't going to sink anyway.

@85 Barefoot, showing a video of a Master Craft jammed into reverse while at speed isn't appropriate to this case either if the driver in the case was truly at idle speed.  All I'm saying is that the facts don't add up to me, and a sticker isn't going to save anybody.

[85 Barefoot]

41 minutes ago, amartin said:

85 - you must be a lawyer.  I base this on two observations:  There is no one in the world as passionate about justifying the value that lawyers provide than lawyers themselves; and UW said that he considers himself an expert at navigation, not at judging where to put people in a boat.  I have been in 2 of the 4 "positons" in the courtroom - jury box and witness stand.  It always amazes me how well a good litigator can turn someone's words around to completely change their obvious intent.

For clarity, I am not attacking you or trying to insult you and I could very well be wrong about your profession.  I have some very good friends who are all kinds of attorneys and while I enjoy their company, I generally see things pretty differently than they do on alot of these types of issues - but isn't that what makes life interesting for us all!

Did you read my post about my relative's death (he was my cousin), which explained their difficulty in finding a lawyer?  I don't recall ever saying what I do on here, and won't, for several reasons.  Same for why I don't list my boats.  

But to your points, I don't recall justifying anything, what I have reacted to is the arbitrary criticism of the verdict given by 12 people who know way more than we ever will, and as former owner of this boat, I have my own, relatively passionate perspective. 

As to UW, his post was: "there's no way I'm putting 200 lbs up there unless I'm idling in a no wake zone, and I'd rate my navigation abilities as expert level."  The only point I've made is that if he's an expert, and knows not to put 200#s in his bow, after decades of boating, it's reasonable that people who are not experts would not know not to do so without being told.  Respectfully, I don't see how anything is being twisted.  I'm sure UW will reply if he feels differently.

[Jhucke]

On 9/13/2021 at 4:53 PM, 85 Barefoot said:

I don't know what you infer by angle.  I have no involvement, nor know anyone who is,  if that's what you're asking.  I do have an opinion in response to the loud voices that this was some miscarriage of justice.  I don't have a problem with 12 people on the jury, hearing what they did for 2.5 weeks (reportedly), coming to the conclusion they did.  I am a former Response LX owner if that's an "angle".  Furthermore, I did have a relative get killed in an accident in which the manufacturer should have known about a significant danger for which they provided no protection (that was not boating related).  Contrary to the blanket assertions herein, they had a heckuva time finding any attorney, and I appreciated that who did finally  help them risked an incredible amount of time and money to get to the bottom of what can only be described as a lazy, cost-cutting design.  So, I'm not willing to listen to people impune the Batchelder lawyers for doing all they can for their client, nor agree with the bandwagon that justice was incorrectly served.

What's your "angle" Jhucke?

Okay, lol. I don't have an angle. Was just curious because it seemed like you were defending the prop safety guy, as if its new information that spinning propellers are dangerous. Seems like if you're on any low-slung ski boat it doesn't take much time to learn that it's easy to take water over the bow and dip it under. I've seen inexperienced drivers swamp their 197's on a glassy ski set turning around to pick up a fallen skier.  I could see some kid flying out of the bow during one of those situations just as easily, I don't plan to test it though so sorry I don't have a source for this. I'm imagining doing donuts and hitting your own rollers on purpose and thinking.. no shoot you're going to dip the bow & I can't see how that's malibus fault.  $200m just seems like a figure that would be assigned to a company that purposefully sold a boat that killed people. I don't know, I'm not a lawyer, I think you might be though?

Edited September 15, 2021 by Jhucke

[ahopkins22LSV]

Guys, quit with the swearing and don’t go down the road of personally attacking each other or this thread will get locked faster than that pro star nose diving. 

[85 Barefoot]

48 minutes ago, UWSkier said:

It must have been a long time since you owned this boat because this is false.  If you get water in the bow of the Response LX, it will flow back the same as any other boat.  Most of it will pour out by the driver's footwell or the port gunnel.  The front is not a bowl.  It's open to the observer compartment and drivers footwell behind it.  I intentionally unblock this area in the hot summer months because as the driver, I like the airflow from the bow up through the driver's compartment.  In winter, I block it off.

I would concede that the bowpen is not "sealed" off, the water will eventually drain, but I cannot agree that a bow dipped Response LX is comparable to a bow-dipped Rlxi.  They are not comparable in their ability to quickly move weight and water back to save a bow up orientation.  

So, to be clear, I "should" have said won't drain quickly enough for the driver to correct by raising the bow through power like every other open bow that is a walk-through.  Better?

Edited September 15, 2021 by 85 Barefoot

[85 Barefoot]

2 hours ago, justgary said:

Thank you for confirming that.  I had thought it was the case.

Also, I'm pretty sure that the 2000 RLX had foam in the floor, so the boat wasn't going to sink anyway.

@85 Barefoot, showing a video of a Master Craft jammed into reverse while at speed isn't appropriate to this case either if the driver in the case was truly at idle speed.  All I'm saying is that the facts don't add up to me, and a sticker isn't going to save anybody.

He's not correct.  At least not completely.  See my response to him.  

Furthermore, click this link and go down a bit.  This might be a sunsetter LXI, but if so, it's a 99-04, but could still be a Response LX.  In 99 they went to that trunk.  In any event, divers aren't needed for swamped boats, they are for sunk boats.  Look on the right side:

https://teamtalk.mastercraft.com/showthread.php?t=10285&t=10285

 

Look here's the deal,  I'm a former dealership employee.  I've owned all of these boats that are being compared to and including the Response LX.  It is unique.  I've got thousands of hours in these boats.  If anyone's experience posting in this thread is limited to models OTHER than a Response LX, it is simply not comparable.  Yes of course you can still submarine a Response Lxi, like the prostar 197 in the video (and of course at much slower speeds), but their responses (no pun intended) to a bow swamp is just flat not the same as in a Response LX.  

And I have to disagree Gary, that warning sticker would have saved Malibu $140M.

Edited September 15, 2021 by 85 Barefoot

[IXFE]

5 minutes ago, ahopkinsVTX said:

Guys, quit with the swearing and don’t go down the road of personally attacking each other or this thread will get locked faster than that pro star nose diving. 

Thanks for keeping us on track but letting this continue.  On teamtalk this thread would have been closed before it started (if the rental boat had been an Mc, of course)  

It’s been a super interesting read and I love the passion.  Ironically, our mystery guests have all disappeared…. I guess they figure they’ve taken their victory lap… all that’s left is us friends arguing with each other (nothing new there, right fellas?). 

No point to my post other than this thread (and others like it) is what makes TMC great. It’s like a family debate at the dinner table. While all may not agree, we have respect for each-others expertise (I love when that’s on display), and are still a family in the end!

[Surfbeast21]

2 minutes ago, IXFE said:

Thanks for keeping us on track but letting this continue.  On teamtalk this thread would have been closed before it started (if the rental boat had been an Mc, of course)  

It’s been a super interesting read and I love the passion.  Ironically, our mystery guests have all disappeared…. I guess they figure they’ve taken their victory lap… all that’s left is us friends arguing with each other (nothing new there, right fellas?). 

No point to my post other than this thread (and others like it) is what makes TMC great. It’s like a family debate at the dinner table. While all may not agree, we have respect for each-others expertise (I love when that’s on display), and are still a family in the end!

Some are like that Aunt that comes for Christmas dinner, that I’m pretty sure “Google” calls when they don’t know something. 😏

[Sparky450]

17 minutes ago, IXFE said:

Thanks for keeping us on track but letting this continue.  On teamtalk this thread would have been closed before it started (if the rental boat had been an Mc, of course)  

It’s been a super interesting read and I love the passion.  Ironically, our mystery guests have all disappeared…. I guess they figure they’ve taken their victory lap… all that’s left is us friends arguing with each other (nothing new there, right fellas?). 

No point to my post other than this thread (and others like it) is what makes TMC great. It’s like a family debate at the dinner table. While all may not agree, we have respect for each-others expertise (I love when that’s on display), and are still a family in the end!

And this conversation is like talking politics, with some of those relatives, at dinner. We just don't agree with each others opinions, and probably never will. It doesn't matter how much persuasion is done. I gave up a long time ago.

[85 Barefoot]

5 minutes ago, Sparky450 said:

And this conversation is like talking politics, with some of those relatives, at dinner. We just don't agree with each others opinions, and probably never will. It doesn't matter how much persuasion is done. I gave up a long time ago.

I agree and I'm going to do the same. 

If you have a Response LX, be careful.  

[Sparky450]

1 minute ago, 85 Barefoot said:

 

If you have a Response LX, be careful.  

No, Response but I have taken water over my 25lsv. 

Fact of the matter is, you have to be careful with any boat. That is not rocket science. People get rewarded every day for not excepting responsibility, for there own lack of judgement and common sense. It is always somebody else's fault.

Especially when an attorney gets involved and says "I can get money for this"

If I had posted what I wanted to post, it would have been turned around. Just like you did @UWSkier.  Attorneys are good at that.

 

[UWSkier]

46 minutes ago, 85 Barefoot said:

He's not correct.  At least not completely.  See my response to him.  

Furthermore, click this link and go down a bit.  This might be a sunsetter LXI, but if so, it's a 99-04, but could still be a Response LX.  In 99 they went to that trunk.  In any event, divers aren't needed for swamped boats, they are for sunk boats.  Look on the right side:

https://teamtalk.mastercraft.com/showthread.php?t=10285&t=10285

 

Look here's the deal,  I'm a former dealership employee.  I've owned all of these boats that are being compared to and including the Response LX.  It is unique.  I've got thousands of hours in these boats.  If anyone's experience posting in this thread is limited to models OTHER than a Response LX, it is simply not comparable.  Yes of course you can still submarine a Response Lxi, and the prostar 197 in the video, but their responses (no pun intended) to a bow swamp is just flat not the same as in a Response LX.  

I respect your opinion and know you've been around these boats a lot, but comparing a 197 to RLX is not apples to apples.  Every 197 I've been in has a flip up seat that blocks the bow walkway.  This acts as a dam for the water.  As would the aux observer seats that were so popular in the RLXi.  The Response LX does not have this issue.  The only thing that could block water flowing back would be if the observer seat area was jam packed with impenetrable surfaces.  It's not completely wide open, but it's not a scoop either.  There's plenty of relief here.

I just so happen to have my RLX sitting outside airing out this morning.  I keep the front seat out of my boat so you can clearly see the relief.  I also get the irony of the weight bag... lol