Steely Dan Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Linkage If these kids see dime one from this I'll puke! :wallbash: S.F. denies claim of tiger-attack survivors John Coté, Chronicle Staff Writer Saturday, May 10, 2008 (05-09) 11:45 PDT San Francisco - -- San Francisco officials have denied a claim by two San Jose brothers who seek unspecified monetary compensation after surviving a Christmas Day tiger attack at the San Francisco Zoo, documents released Friday show. Images Paul Dhaliwal. Chronicle photo by Paul ChinnKulbir Dhaliwal. Chronicle photo by Paul Chinn View Larger Images S.F. Zoo Mauling The move paves the way for an expected lawsuit, which through a trial or depositions could shed light on exactly what happened Dec. 25, when a 243-pound Siberian tiger named Tatiana escaped her enclosure and mauled three young men from San Jose, killing one. "Now we're free to file a lawsuit," said Mark Geragos, an attorney for Kulbir and Paul Dhaliwal, the two brothers who survived the mauling. The brothers contend that they suffered serious injuries and emotional harm during the attack. The tiger killed 19-year-old Paul Dhaliwal's close friend Carlos Sousa Jr., 17, before police shot and killed the animal. The claims the brothers filed with the city are a precursor to a lawsuit. Such claims are routinely denied if they involve disputed issues. The brothers now have six months to file a lawsuit against the city, said Matt Dorsey, a spokesman for City Attorney Dennis Herrera. Geragos said a lawsuit will be filed. "This is sort of a procedural hoop," Dorsey said. "It would be really unusual for any case where there is a question of comparative fault or liability to be settled in a claim." A letter from Herrera's office dated Thursday states there is "no indication of liability on the part of the city and county" in the incident, and directs the brothers to file a claim with the San Francisco Zoological Society, the nonprofit organization that operates the zoo. The zoo and its animals are owned by the city of San Francisco. The city maintains that the zoological society's lease and management agreement require it handle liability claims, Dorsey said. The Dhaliwal brothers can proceed with their lawsuit without filing an additional claim with the zoological society, Geragos said. Zoo spokeswoman Lora LaMarca said officials there have been working closely with Herrera's office. She declined to comment on the brothers' claims because of the expected lawsuit. In the claims the brothers filed in March, Los Angeles attorneys Geragos and Shepard Kopp say that Kulbir Dhaliwal, 24, underwent surgery on both knees because of wounds he suffered in the attack. The claim also contends he was deprived of the use of his BMW M3, the car they took to the zoo. Police impounded the car during their investigation. Sousa's parents plan to file a claim against the city within a month, said their attorney, Michael Cardoza. That effort has been hampered by the Police Department's refusal to hand over reports about the incident and the coroner's refusal to provide the autopsy results, Cardoza said. "We're very frustrated," Cardoza said. "It's very interesting, and it makes one question what is going on." The Dhaliwals' claims also state that a public relations firm conducted a "smear campaign" against the brothers, humiliating and degrading them. The claims specifically cite Sam Singer, a well-known crisis management spokesman whose firm was retained by the zoo after the attack. Singer has suggested the brothers might have done something to provoke the tiger attack, an accusation that the Dhaliwals' attorneys have denied. Singer has since denounced the allegation that he was part of a smear campaign as "completely false." After the attack, zoo officials found that the wall of the tiger enclosure was about 4 feet shorter than recommended by a national accreditation group. That group, the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, concluded that the zoo was dangerously understaffed and inadequately prepared for handling such an emergency that night, according to a report released in March. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 One the brothers that survived (has scars on his head) is going to spend the next 16 months in jail. Article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 One the brothers that survived (has scars on his head) is going to spend the next 16 months in jail. Article Where's PETA to sue on the Tiger's behalf.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Where's PETA to sue on the Tiger's behalf.... I was going to say that the County should sue the brothers for the cost of the loss of the tiger. Not only to get another one, but lost revenue from it not being around. Seems only fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 I was going to say that the County should sue the brothers for the cost of the loss of the tiger. Not only to get another one, but lost revenue from it not being around. Seems only fair. Bingo. No way these three upstanding citizens were not provoking that tiger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted August 27, 2008 Author Share Posted August 27, 2008 One the brothers that survived (has scars on his head) is going to spend the next 16 months in jail. Article The brothers also contend the zoo orchestrated a smear campaign against them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted November 13, 2008 Author Share Posted November 13, 2008 Latest on the case Dorsey said it's not a surprise that the Dhaliwal brothers filed suit because they filed a claim against the city of San Francisco on March 27 that was a precursor to a lawsuit. The city denied the claim May 8. However, Dorsey said he's somewhat surprised that the suit was filed in federal court instead of state court, which may indicate that the basis for the suit is different than the basis for the claim. The brothers' claim blamed city officials and the zoo for their injuries and also sought damages for defamation in the aftermath of the highly-publicized incident. :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodBye Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 If you think this lawsuit is silly, look at this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted November 14, 2008 Author Share Posted November 14, 2008 If you think this lawsuit is silly, look at this one. Oy Vey what's the world coming to. That one's bad but I don't think it holds a candle to irritating a tiger until it tries to kill you and then crying that he tried to she tried to kill you. The zoo should sue them for the cost of one new tiger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodBye Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 Oy Vey what's the world coming to. That one's bad but I don't think it holds a candle to irritating a tiger until it tries to kill you and then crying that he tried to she tried to kill you. The zoo should sue them for the cost of one new tiger. I just think that the mother should put her time in to something more productive....like getting the word out about bicycle road rules. I think most kids may not have any idea what they are. I witness this daily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted November 14, 2008 Author Share Posted November 14, 2008 I just think that the mother should put her time in to something more productive....like getting the word out about bicycle road rules. I think most kids may not have any idea what they are. I witness this daily. No, there's no money in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 If you think this lawsuit is silly, look at this one. The lawsuit claims that TriMet was "negligent in failing to keep a proper lookout for bicycle traffic." It names only the transit agency as a defendant in the suit, not Sandy Mann, the 53-year-old bus driver. That's rich. I mean, really, REALLY rich. Suing an entire metro transit organization for not watching out for her bike-riding son? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ1 Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 My only regret is that the police killed the tiger before she could finish off the other two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodBye Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 No, there's no money in it. Not if they pay her to work WITH them and not against them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodBye Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 That's rich. I mean, really, REALLY rich. Suing an entire metro transit organization for not watching out for her bike-riding son? Her son that ran the red light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 Her son that ran the red light. 3 white tigers kicked ass in a singapore zoo yesterday too. some worker dumbass wandered in there and got what's coming to him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tcali Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 I dont think the lads should be ab;e to get anything other than medical IF in fact they provoked the TIGER...BUT----its a zoo and the zoo is at fault for having an enclosure where the TIgers could escape. There were some bizarre reports about people seeing the Tigers jump up and get a paw over the top of the enclosure a year or 2 before this incident. What if a couple of little kids started acting goofy and jumped up and down and made faces at the Tiger ??/--They would have deserved to be maimed and killed for being kids and acting idiotic? No excuse for the ZOO. Even if the teenagers were being arses.--Altho I would limit the surviving kids in their compensation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted November 14, 2008 Author Share Posted November 14, 2008 Not if they pay her to work WITH them and not against them. They would never pay her anywhere near what she'll make if she wins this suit. 3 white tigers kicked ass in a singapore zoo yesterday too. some worker dumbass wandered in there and got what's coming to him Linkage I dont think the lads should be ab;e to get anything other than medical IF in fact they provoked the TIGER...BUT----its a zoo and the zoo is at fault for having an enclosure where the TIgers could escape.There were some bizarre reports about people seeing the Tigers jump up and get a paw over the top of the enclosure a year or 2 before this incident. What if a couple of little kids started acting goofy and jumped up and down and made faces at the Tiger ??/--They would have deserved to be maimed and killed for being kids and acting idiotic? No excuse for the ZOO. Even if the teenagers were being arses.--Altho I would limit the surviving kids in their compensation. Reports are that these guys were whipping pine cones at the tiger and maybe some other stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 If you think this lawsuit is silly, look at this one. Didn't we have a lively thread here a while back about people on bicycles who think the rules of the road do not apply to them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 Her son that ran the red light. And hit the bus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts