Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihuxf.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!clyde!floyd!whuxle!pyuxll!abnjh!u1100a!pyuxn!pyuxww!mhuxm!mhuxl!ihnp4!ihuxf!larry
From: larry@ihuxf.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Re: mandatory seatbelt laws
Message-ID: <1975@ihuxf.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 28-Jan-84 11:11:22 EST
Article-I.D.: ihuxf.1975
Posted: Sat Jan 28 11:11:22 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 31-Jan-84 03:11:02 EST
References: <340@sequent.UUCP> <898@druxu.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 20

Speaking of letting the "insurance company's adjust payments based on if the
occupants were wearing their seat belts"... There was a story on a local news
show yesterday that a Chicago mother & daughter got their adjustment in court.
Seems that they had been ``innocent victoms'' in an accident and had sued for
X-millions of dollars - while the jury found them in the right, their
compensation was reduced to a *mere* $10,000.  Why?  The just deceided that
the injuries wouldn't have been as severe IF they would have had their
seatbelts on!

---PLEASE NOTE---

Do NOT flame back to me about the merits of seatbelts and the circumstances of
this incident!!  I am just reporting what happened.  [I happen to be very
PRO-seatbelts, and very ANTI-passive restraint device - but I admit not
knowing HOW to get people to wear them]
-- 


		Larry Marek
		 ihnp4!ihuxf!larry