1. I recently read a news article that is still eating at me (to be discussed below)
2. I have not made a post in a long time. I have been busy.
3. There are a lot of things going on in this country that can’t continually be overlooked.
4. This post is about dignity, dying , veterans and a motorcycle organization of honor.

Recently I stumbled across an post entitled Obama Tells Patriot Guard Get Lost. Yes, it is kind of an old article, April of this year, but not old enough to raise a valid concern over it. First off, the title of the post is a little misleading as no one apparently no for sure who called off the Patriot Guard Riders from being allowed. One thing was for sure the families of the 29 miners killed in a West Virginia mine accident asked for and welcomed the riders. Evidently so did the Governor of the state. So to set the scene a little better, on April 5, 2010 there was a huge coal mine disaster that took the lives of 29 miners. A memorial was planed for late April and the families of the miners asked the Patriot Guard Riders to attend and escort with honor their loved ones. Somewhere along the line a message was sent that the Patriot Guard were to “stand down” for this mission as Obama and Bidden were to attend. Again, no one has come forward with who actually issued the order, but I am sure it was relayed through the secret service.

Whoever made the decision is under a huge misconception on what this group of people stand for and exactly what it is that they do. They certainly would not have posed any type of a security risk for Obama, if anything security would have been tighter. They are a nationwide organization many of which are law enforcement officers and veterans. What possible threat could they have posed. Did they see them as a motorcycle gang, just because they ride motorcycles? Was there some sort of paranoia fear that some rival gang might ride in and have a big shootout? By far, the Patriot Riders are not a gang, they are motorcycle riders period. It is the mode of transportation that they choose and I speak from experience when I say that they add a great deal of honor and dignity to a funeral procession and memorial. My brother died on the streets a homeless vet in July of 2005. I asked the Sanford Chapter of Rolling Thunder if they would give my brother Lonny one last ride before I scattered his ashes in the water at the Veterans Memorial Park in Titusville. My brother loved and respected the grounds of this park and spent a lot of time there. On the day of his last ride along with Rolling Thunder there were also members of the Patriot Guard riders. I have the deepest respect for what they did that day and how they honored my Brother. I have some pictures of that day that I would like to share with you, this is what the Patriot Guard is

These people took the time out of their life to honor my brother and asked for nothing in return

over 30 motorcycles lined up for the memorial service

A short service was given before I set my brother free

 This is what the Patriot Guard Riders mean for me. They brought honor and dignity to the last ride and memorial service for my brother Lonny Odom. For the families of the 29 miners to be denied the same honor and respect was wrong. Whoever made the decision not to allow these people their rights were very wrong. My heart goes out to the 29 men who lost their lives and the loved ones they left behind. Now I share with you a documentary on the Patriot Guard Riders, who they are and what they stand for. How could these men and women have been considered a threat?

Click here to view the embedded video.

So now those who did not know may be a little wiser as to not only the Patriot Guard Riders and groups like Rolling Thunder, but the entire biker community in general. Respect is always given were respect is due. One more video of a funeral escorted by the Patriot Guard below. This video brings chills to me, just to see the endless line of motorcycles following in honor of a fallen military hero that has paid the ultimate sacrifice. 

Click here to view the embedded video.

Thanks again to those who came out to honor my brother, this post has been a long time coming. You don’t have to support the war folks, but always support our troops!

Dedicated to my dearly loved brother Marvin Lonny Odom

Technorati Tags: motorcycles, patriot guard riders, rolling thunder, funerals, veterans, west virginia, mining disaster, politics, security, honor

People who looked at this item also looked at…

• Biketober Photos
• Photo Gallery
• Mike’s Favorites
• Photo Gallery
• About

Related items

• Competing for “biker bucks”
• Is the Second Amendment in jeopardy
• Biketoberfest in Daytona Beach?
• Blog Action Day Post – Gopher Tortoise
• Congratulations, YOU made it!

The early morning launch of the space shuttle Endeavour was short for viewing due to a low cloud ceiling. Night launches light up the sky even in Melbourne over 30 miles away from the launch pad in Titusville, Florida. This launch viewing was very short. The Endeavour was gone from our view long before the sound of the rocket engines hit our area. Any way here is a video of what we saw at 2:38 am Tuesday morning from our location on the Indian River at the Melbourne causeway. NASA has reported that the Endeavour has docked smoothly with the International Space Station about an hour ago.

Technorati Tags: shuttle, space, endeavour, NASA, launch, video, Melbourne, Florida

People who looked at this item also looked at…

• Happy to have helped
• The longest running Harley blog post!
• Super Bowl Ads waiting for the halftime show

Related items

• Super Bowl Ads waiting for the halftime show
• Osama Bin Laden killed hiding in plain site
• Is the Second Amendment in jeopardy
• Sunday Motorcycle Video Naked Cowboy?
• Britney Spears’ new boyfriend Adnan Ghalib hits motorcycle and leaves!

(Titusville, Florida) A calendar call was scheduled today at 1:30 pm in the civil trial filed against Billy Lane and Dodge by the Mother of Gerald Morelock for the wrongful death of her son.

The motion filed on behalf of Billy Lane and Dodge states that because evidence was found from a autopsy report showing that Gerald Morelock had alcohol in his blood, that the plaintiff should share responsibility in the crash. Lane was driving a promotional Dodge pickup loaned to him on labor day 2006 when he struck and killed Gerald Morelock. Billy Lane refused to submit to any type of alcohol test, but blood was taken 45 minutes after the September 4th crash and sent to The Florida Department of Law Enforcement crime lab.

Billy Lane’s BAC was returned by the FDLE crime lab reflecting a blood alcohol level of .192, while the autopsy report of Gerald Morelock later showed he had a blood level of .133. The attorneys for the defense of Billy Lane and DaimlerChrysler filed the motion hoping to show that the plaintiff could have had equal responsibility in the crash for this reason.

The motion was denied by the court when Attorney Sam Cacciatore pointed to case law showing that this motion would hold the “Plaintiff” at partial fault. The plaintiff in this case is Dolores Morelock, the mother of Gerald Morelock.

Mr. Cacciatore told me that the motion was suitable for a case were the plaintiff was injured. Because this is a wrongful death suit and Mrs. Morelock was the plaintiff, she could not be held responsible shared or otherwise for the crash. The civil action against Billy Lane and Dodge is scheduled to be heard in late August.

Billy Lane still faces a criminal charge of DUI Manslaughter from the same crash and could face up to 15 years in jail. No trial date has been set for the criminal case yet.

Technorati Tags: DUI, DWI, Billy Lane, Dodge, Melbourne, Titusville Florida, court, trial, civil, criminal, law, motorcycle news

People who looked at this item also looked at…

• Passenger in Billy Lane DUI Case files civil law suit
• Settlement reached in Billy Lane Civil Case with Morelock Family
• Billy Lane Trial Update – Prosecutor’s motion granted, defense motion in wings
• More delays in the Billy Lane trial
• Billy Lane’s Civil and Criminal Cases Clash

Related items

• Billy Lane’s Civil and Criminal Cases Clash
• Billy Lane Trial Update – Prosecutor’s motion granted, defense motion in wings
• Dodge answers auto negligence suit
• Passenger in Billy Lane DUI Case files civil law suit
• Settlement reached in Billy Lane Civil Case with Morelock Family

Billy Lane’s new criminal attorney, Gregory Eisenmenger was present at the 4:15 pm hearing in the civil case filed against Billy Lane and DaimlerChrysler for the wrongful death of Gerald Morelock. Mr. Eisenmenger announced to the court that he was sitting in today because “ today’s hearing touches on advice I have given my client in the criminal case” and “I am here to help answer questions and advise”.

In fact, no questions were answered. The reason for today’s hearing was whether the questions would be answered or not. Also present today, by telephone, Sammy Cacciatore and Sam Cacciatore for plaintiff Dolores Morelock and Jefferey Vernis for Billy Lane. William McCandless, attorney for DaimlerChrysler was on the conference call as well.

Attorney Sam Cacciatore, filed a request for admissions with the court, asking Billy Lane to answer questions that could shorten the civil hearing time in court. Billy Lane’s civil and criminal attorneys agreed that it was in Billy Lane’s best interest to invoke the 5^th amendment and not answer the questions because the criminal trial for DUI Manslaughter against Lane was still on-going. Questions pertaining to venue, such as time, date and place were under objection. Criminal attorney Eisenmenger stated that it was up to the State of Florida to prove that the crash happened, adding that they must also prove where and when, along with the identity of the deceadant, Gerald Morelock in the criminal case against Lane. Eisenmenger later added that answering these questions could be extremely damaging to his client with the criminal charges still pending.

Most of the objections to the questions were sustained by Judge Moxley, as they were read to the court one by one. These questions will all be presented in a later article here on this blog. Judge Moxley did overrule on a few of the objectionable questions. Cacciatore had requested that Billy Lane produce all documents pertaining to any type of lease agreement that he had with Dodge for the Dodge Ram pickup that he was driving the night of the crash. In response, civil attorney Vernis stated that there was no written agreement between Dodge and Billy Lane for the promotional vehicles that Lane had in his possession and control. Vernis called the question very broad for the plaintiffs to ask for any and all documents.

Objections were heard from both of Billy Lane’s attorneys when questions were asked about Erin Derrick, the female passenger with Billy Lane on the night of the crash. Attorney Sam Cacciatore said “ we have no idea what the relationship was” between Billy Lane and Erin Derrick. Eisenmenger, said that Ms. Derrick could be a link in the chain of evidence for the criminal case and had advised Lane not to answer. It was determined by the court that Lane would have to answer the question regarding his driving history by listing all traffic citations prior to the Labor Day crash. I asked attorney Greg Eisenmenger how he felt about the decisions. Eisenmenger stated “ I think the judge ruled appropriately in all respects.

I will elaborate as to all of the questions in a full article tomorrow.

Technorati Tags: billy lane, motorcycle news, blog, dui, trial, court, florida, celebrity news

People who looked at this item also looked at…

• Passenger in Billy Lane DUI Case files civil law suit
• Autopsy report reveals new evidence in Billy Lane DUI Case
• Billy Lane Trial Update – Prosecutor’s motion granted, defense motion in wings
• Billy Lane DUI hearing cancelled, no new date set
• Settlement reached in Billy Lane Civil Case with Morelock Family

Related items

• Passenger in Billy Lane DUI Case files civil law suit
• Billy Lane Trial Update – Prosecutor’s motion granted, defense motion in wings
• Morelock V. Billy Lane civil trial motion heard
• Auto negligence case against Billy Lane and Dodge set for trial
• Billy Lane Changes Attorney In Criminal DUI Manslaughter Case

Bremmer has been charged with DUI manslaughter, driving with a suspended license, violation of right of way and DUI with property damage. Trooper Kim Miller also noted that if someone lent Bremmer the truck on a revoked license, that person could face fines for allowing an unauthorized driver access.

Because, Trooper Kim Miller, the public information officer for the FHP does not recognize me as a news source, I have to refer to a story just released to the mass media published in the Sun Sentinel for this post.

Source:

http://www.sun-sentinel.com

Technorati Tags: motorcycle news, dui, drunk driving, florida, titusville, blog

People who looked at this item also looked at…

• Billy Lane in North Carolina Court for DUI
• Passenger in Billy Lane DUI Case files civil law suit
• Morelock V. Billy Lane civil trial motion heard
• It happens all the time
• Did Billy Lane win $50,000 and was there an interview?

Related items

• Morelock V. Billy Lane civil trial motion heard
• Billy Lane’s Civil and Criminal Cases Clash
• Auto negligence case against Billy Lane and Dodge set for trial
• Dodge answers auto negligence suit
• Judge signs order in suit against Billy Lane and Dodge

(Titusville, Florida) Trial target date set for August 20, 2007 in wrongful death auto negligence case against Billy Lane and DaimlerChrysler Corporation.

Although today’s appearance in the civil case against Billy Lane and Dodge was a calendar hearing, there were some motions presented to the court. Present at the hearing today were Jeffery Vernis, Esq. and Terrance Perkins attorneys for defendant, William D. Lane. William McCandless, attorney for defendant, DaimlerChrysler, was present by telephone. Representing the plaintiff(s) Dolores J. Morelock, Estate of Gerald V Morelock, were S. Sammy Cacciatore and Sammy M. Cacciatore. The hearing was held in chambers of Honorable Judge John D. Moxley Jr. at 1:30 pm today.

Jeffrey Vernis Presented an oral argument to the court on his Motion To Dismiss, filed November 26, 2006, asking the court to dismiss the case against Lane. The Motion To Dismiss states that the plaintiff fails to set forth the required elements of negligence in the complaint filed. Vernis made oral argument before the court on the motion to dismiss while citing the Florida Law, Rules & Guidelines and case law. Cacciatore stated to the court that while he felt the complaint was sufficient, he would be willing to add the word “negligence” to paragraph 9 in an amended complaint. Judge Moxley denied the motion to dismiss and accepted the offer of the amended complaint.

Jeffrey Vernis next approached the court on the Motion For Speedy Trial that was filed by the plaintiff on November 7, 2006. Vernis stated that the motion had been ruled on without being heard and asked that the court entertain his response. Judge Moxley allowed Vernis to go on and then asked if he could be prepared for trial in four and a half months. Vernis called the motion for speedy trial “premature” and stated “your Honor, I would be very shocked if we could be ready for trial in four and a half months.” Judge Moxley upheld the motion for speedy trial and set the trial to be heard on August 20, 2007.

William McCandless, attorney for DaimlerChrysler was to speak to the court by telephone about the affirmative defenses that he had filed on November 15, 2006, but McCandless had another call and disconnected from the hearing.

Technorati Tags: auto negligence, billy lane, daimlerchrysler, dui, law, motorcycle news, wrongful death, dodge, court, titusville, florida

People who looked at this item also looked at…

• Passenger in Billy Lane DUI Case files civil law suit
• Billy Lane’s Civil and Criminal Cases Clash
• Lane trial in holding pattern
• Judge signs order in suit against Billy Lane and Dodge
• Auto Negligence claim filed against Billy Lane and Dodge

Related items

• Billy Lane’s Civil and Criminal Cases Clash
• Judge accepts plea in Lane case sentencing scheduled for August
• Passenger in Billy Lane DUI Case files civil law suit
• Dodge answers auto negligence suit
• Judge signs order in suit against Billy Lane and Dodge

This is going to be a rather lengthy post because the answer contains in all, 37 responses. Problem being, as in all answers in law, the document does not contain the questions. So, for me to post just the answers would not make much sense. It would be very tricky to go back and forth from the page that has some of the questions to this page. Not only tricky, but confusing. The other option I considered was to only post some of the most important or highlight responses. Whereas that would not be fair, some may want to know things that are omitted, while others may say items were omitted intentionally.

Basically this will be a recap of what has transpired with the addition of the answers that are on the document that I retrieved from the Brevard County Clerks office today. Although the answer was filed on the 14th of November, it had not been in the case folder up until today when I checked.

With that said, below this will be the text of the two documents that are pertaining to one another. The complaint filed for the Plaintiff, Dolores Morelock, mother of Gerald Morelock and the answer filed for the Defendant, DaimlerChrysler. I should mention here as well, the attorneys involved.

• Defendant (1) William D. Lane
  Party Attorney: Terence R. Perkins
  Party Attorney: G. Jeffrey Vernis

• Defendant (2) Daimlerchrysler Corporation
  Party Attorney: William McCandless

• Plaintiff (1) Dolores J. Morelock
  Party Attorney: S. Sammy Cacciatore JR

• Plaintiff (2) Estate of Gerald V Morelock
  Party Attorney: S. Sammy Cacciatore JR

Allegations Common To All Counts

1. This is an action for damages which exceed the sum of fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000.00).

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

2. At all material times hereto, the decedent. Gerald V. Morelock, was a resident of Brevard County, Florida.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

3. At all times material hereto, Dolores J. Morelock, was the mother to Gerald V. Morelock, deceased.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

4. At all times material hereto, the Plaintiff, Dolores J. Morelock, was the duly authorized personal representative of the estate of Gerald V. Morelock.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

5. At all times material hereto, the Defendant, William D. Lane was a resident of the State of Florida.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

6. The Defendant, Daimlerchrysler Corporation, at all material times was and is incorporated in the State of Michigan and has been authorized to transact business in the State

DC denies the allegations in the form and manner alleged as untrue.

7. The Defendant, Daimlerchrysler Corporation, at all material times was the owner of the 2006 Dodge pickup truck with Michigan tag number 2922HU (hereinafter referred to as “2006 Dodge pickup truck”).

DC admits the allegations.

8. The Defendant, Daimlerchrysler Corporation, at all times material to this action manufactured, distributed and marketed motor vehicles under the trademark Dodge.

DC admits the allegations.

9. On or about the 4th day of September, 2006, the decedent, Gerald V. Morelock, wearing a helmet, was properly operating his 1983 Yamaha motorcycle with his headlight illuminated northbound on State Road A1A at the same time as the Defendant, William D. Lane, was operating the 2006 Dodge pickup truck southbound on State Road A1A in the northbound lane and hit the motorcycle operated by the decedent, Gerald V. Morelock, head on.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

10. The Plaintiff’s decedent, Gerald V. Morelock, died on the 4th day of September, 2006 in Brevard County, Florida.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

11. At the time of the collision, the Defendant, William D. Lane, was operating the promotional 2006 Dodge pickup which was owned by DaimlerChrysler Corporation, and had been provided along with other promotional vehicles to the Defendant, William D. Lane, for his use.

DC admits that it furnished the subject vehicle for Lane’s use but denies the remaining allegations in the form and manner alleged.

12. The 2006 Dodge pickup was and is a promotional vehicle with logos, advertising art work and the “Dodge” name prominently all over the front, side and rear of the vehicle for the purpose of advertising and marketing Dodge pickup trucks. Three photographs of that 2006 Dodge pickup promotional vehicle are attached as Exhibit “A1 through A3″.

DC denies the allegations in the form and manner alleged.

13. At all material times, the Defendant, William D. Lane, was using the vehicle owned by the Defendant, DaimlerChrysler Corporation, with permission and consent of DaimlerChrysler Corporation and for the economic benefit of the Defendant, DaimlerChrysler Corporation.

DC admits that Lane had DC’s permission to operate the vehicle bu lacks sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations.

14. The Defendant, DaimlerChrysler Corporation, received an economic benefit as a result of the Defendant, William D. Lane, operating the promotional Dodge pickup truck together with the other provided promotional vehicles on the roadways of the State of Florida as well as other states.

DC denies the allegations in the form and manner alleged.

15. At the time of the collision, the Defendant, William D. Lane, was operating the 2006 Dodge pickup truck even though his license was suspended by the State of North Carolina.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

16. At the time of the collision, the Defendant, William D. Lane, was awaiting a sentencing from the courts of North Carolina for a charge of driving under the influence.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

17. At the time of the collision, the Defendant, William D. Lane, was operating his vehicle in excess of the posted speed limited.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

18. At the time of the collision, the Defendant, William D. Lane, was operating his vehicle southbound State Road A1A when he crossed the double yellow line and drove into the northbound lanes of State Road A1A.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

19. At the time of the collision, the Defendant, William D. Lane, had a blood alcohol level of .192, or an amount which is greater that twice the legal limit in the State of Florida.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

20. That as a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid wrongful acts of the Defendant, William D. Lane, Gerald V. Morelock died.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

21. At the time of the decedent’s demise, he was unmarried. The following are the beneficiaries of Gerald V. Morelock, deceased, and their relationship to the Plaintiff’s decedent as set forth by the Florida Wrongful Death Act:

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

COUNT I

NEGLIGENCE OF WILLIAM D. LANE

The Plaintiff incorporates the Allegations Common to All Counts as if fully stated herein.

CLAIM OF THE ESTATE OF GERALD V. MORELOCK, DECEASED

22. As a direct and proximate result of the aforedescribed wrongful acts of the Defendants, William D. Lane and DaimlerChrysler Corporation, and the ensuing death of Gerald V. Morelock, deceased, the estate has experienced the following losses:

1. The loss of earnings of the deceased from the date of injury to the date of his death;
2. The loss of the prospective net accumulations of the estate which reasonably could have been expected but for his wrongful death;
3. Medical expenses due to the decedent’s injury;
4. Funeral expenses.
5. Prejudgement interest at the legal rate on all amounts which the estate has incurred for the property damage loss, medical expenses, and on any other liquidated expenses incurred as a result of the aforedescribed injuries and subsequent death of Gerald V. Morelock.

DC denies the inference of negligence directed against it as untrue. DC lacks sufficient knowledge or information as to the truth of the remaining allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

CLAIM FOR THE BENEFIT OF DOLORES J. MORELOCK

23. As further direct and proximate result of the aforedescribed wrongful acts of the Defendants, William D. Lane and DaimlerChrysler Corporation, and the ensuing death of Gerald V. Morelock, deceased, as a survivor and parent of her deceased child has suffered the following losses:

1. The value of lost support and services from the date of her son’s injury to his death, with interest;
2. The value of the future loss of support and services from the date of her son’s death;
3. Mental pain and suffering from the date of her son’s injury up to the present, and future mental pain and suffering as a result of her son’s death.

DC denies the inference of negligence directed against it as untrue. DC lacks sufficient knowledge or information as to the truth of the remaining allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

Wherefore, Defendant DaimlerChrysler Corporation requests judgment in its favor, along with an award of costs and attorney fees.

COUNT II

LIABILITY OF DAIMLERCHRYSLER

The Plaintiff incorporates the Allegations Common to All Counts as if fully stated herein.

DC incorporates by reference its answers to paragraphs 1-23 of the amended complaint as though set forth herein, paragraph by paragraph and word for word.

24. A motor vehicle is a dangerous instrumentality.

The allegation calls for legal conclusion, for which no answer is required. However, DC acknowledges Florida common law that has construed automobiles to be subject to the “dangerous instrumentality doctrine”.

25. The Defendant, William D. Lane, had a history of disobeying traffic laws, receiving numerous moving citations, and being a reckless, incompetent or unfit driver.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

26. The Defendant, DaimlerChrysler Corporation, knew or should have known through the exercise of due care that the Defendant, William D. Lane, had a history of disobeying traffic laws, receiving numerous moving citations, and being a reckless, incompetent or unfit driver.

DC denies of the allegations as untrue.

27. The Defendant, DaimlerChrysler Corporation, entrusted the 2006 Dodge truck which was involved in the above mentioned crash to the Defendant, William D. Lane, for the economic benefit received from the advertisement and marketing by the Defendant, William D. Lane, operating the promotional 2006 Dodge pickup truck.

DC admits that it provided Lane with the authority to operate the vehicle but denies the remaining allegations in the form and manner alleged as untrue.

28. The entrustment for economic benefit of the Dodge truck by the Defendant, DaimlerChrysler Corporation, to the Defendant, William D. Lane, created an appreciable risk of harm to others, including the deceased, Gerald V. Morelock, and a concomitant or corresponding duty on the part of the Defendant, DaimlerChrysler Corporation.

DC denies the allegations in the form and manner alleged as untrue but admits to those duties imposed upon it by operation of law.

29. The death of the Plaintiff’s decedent, Gerald V. Morelock, was proximately caused by the negligence of both the Defendant, DaimlerChrysler Corporation, entrusting the 2006 Dodge pickup truck to William D. Lane thus providing the opportunity the actions of the Defendant, William D. Lane, as described above.

DC denies the allegations in the form and manner alleged as untrue.

CLAIM OF THE ESTATE OF GERALD V. MORELOCK, DECEASED

30. As a direct and proximate result of the aforedescribed wrongful acts of the Defendants, William D. Lane and DaimlerChrysler Corporation, and the ensuing death of Gerald V. Morelock, deceased, the estate has experienced the following losses:

1. The loss of earnings of the deceased from the date of injury to the date of his death;
2. The loss of the prospective net accumulations of the estate which reasonably could have been expected but for his wrongful death;
3. Medical expenses due to the decedent’s injury;
4. Funeral expenses.
5. Prejudgement interest at the legal rate on all amounts which the estate has incurred for the property damage loss, medical expenses, and on any other liquidated expenses incurred as a result of the aforedescribed injuries and subsequent death of Gerald V. Morelock.

DC denies the allegations in the form and manner alleged as untrue.

CLAIM FOR THE BENEFIT OF DOLORES J. MORELOCK

31. As a further direct and proximate result of the aforedescribed wrongful acts of the Defendants, William D. Lane and DaimlerChrysler Corporation, and the ensuing death of Gerald V. Morelock, deceased, as a survivor and parent of her deceased child has suffered the following losses:

1. The value of lost support and services from the date of her son’s injury to his death, with interest;
2. The value of the future loss of support and services from the date of her son’s death;
3. Mental pain and suffering from the date of her son’s injury up to the present, and future mental pain and suffering as a result of her son’s death.

DC denies the allegations in the form and manner alleged as untrue.

Wherefore, Defendant DaimlerChrysler Corporation requests judgment in its favor, along with an award of costs and attorney fees.

COUNT III

PUNITIVE DAMAGES AGAINST WILLIAM D. LANE

DC incorporates by reference its answers to paragraphs 1-31 of the amended complaint as though set forth herein, paragraph by paragraph and word for word.

32. The Defendant’s, William D. Lane, conduct, specifically drinking alcoholic beverages, operating a motor vehicle, exceeding the posted speed limit, and passing vehicles where there was a double yellow line were intentional acts on the part of the Defendant, William D. Lane, and the Defendant, William D. Lane, had actual knowledge of the wrongfulness of the conduct and the high probability that injury or damage to another individual would result and, despite that knowledge, intentionally pursued that course of conduct.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

33. The Defendant’s, William D. Lane, conduct was so reckless or wonting in care that it constituted a conscious disregard or indifference to the life, safety, or rights of persons exposed to such conduct, such as the decedent, Gerald V. Morelock.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

34. The Defendant’s, William D. Lane, conduct did cause the death of the decedent, Gerald V. Morelock.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

35. A certified copy of the probable cause affidavit is attached as Exhibit “B”.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

CLAIM OF THE ESTATE OF GERALD V. MORELOCK, DECEASED

36. As a direct and proximate result of the aforedescribed wrongful acts of the Defendants, William D. Lane and DaimlerChrysler Corporation, and the ensuing death of Gerald V. Morelock, deceased, the Estate of Gerald V. Morelock seeks Punitive Damages from the Defendant, William D. Lane.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

CLAIM FOR THE BENEFIT OF DOLORES J. MORELOCK

37. As a further direct and proximate result of the aforedescribed wrongful acts of the Defendants, William D. Lane and DaimlerChrysler Corporation, and the ensuing death of Gerald V. Morelock, deceased, as a survivor and parent of her deceased child seeks Punitive Damages from the Defendant, William D. Lane.

DC Lacks sufficient knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and therefore must deny the allegations.

Wherefore, Defendant DaimlerChrysler Corporation requests judgment in its favor, along with an award of costs and attorney fees.

END OF DOCUMENT

Below are the 3 pictures described as evidence Exhibit A1 – A3. The pictures are included as part of the auto negligence claim, not the answer from Dodge.

EXHIBIT A1

EXHIBIT A2

EXHIBIT A3

Source:

Both documents were obtained as public record for case no: 05-2006-CA-058089

Although these documents are public record, it takes me a great deal of time, effort and finances to document this case for the Internet. I ask that you respect this work by linking back to this site when using this article in whole or in part. Thanks.
 

People who looked at this item also looked at…

• Passenger in Billy Lane DUI Case files civil law suit
• Judge signs order in suit against Billy Lane and Dodge
• DaimlerChrysler files affirmative defenses
• Settlement reached in Billy Lane Civil Case with Morelock Family
• Auto negligence case against Billy Lane and Dodge set for trial

Related items

• Billy Lane’s Civil and Criminal Cases Clash
• Passenger in Billy Lane DUI Case files civil law suit
• Morelock V. Billy Lane civil trial motion heard
• New date set for Billy Lane Case – clerical error at fault
• Auto negligence case against Billy Lane and Dodge set for trial

Jeffrey Vernis, attorney for the defendant, Billy Lane, opposed the motion saying it was premature, insufficient on its face, and without substantive support. Vernis also said the motion should not have been filed without the case being scheduled for trial or not being on the trial docket, pointing out twice that the court must consider health as well as age of the plaintff in determining the motion.

Judge Moxley denied the response filed by Jeffrey Vernis on behalf of Billy Lane and granted the motion for speedy trial to the Plaintiff, Dolores Morelock. The motion states: The court is to give preference in this cause in setting matters on the court’s docket.

This case is currently set for Calendar Call: Hearing on February 7, 2007 at 1:30 pm to be heard at the Titusville Historic Courthouse in Titusville, Florida

Source:

DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SPEEDY TRIAL

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SPEEDY TRIAL

Both documents were obtained as public record for case no: 05-2006-CA-058089

People who looked at this item also looked at…

• More delays in the Billy Lane trial
• Passenger in Billy Lane DUI Case files civil law suit
• Billy Lane DUI hearing cancelled, no new date set
• Lane trial in holding pattern
• Morelock V. Billy Lane civil trial motion heard

Related items

• Billy Lane’s Civil and Criminal Cases Clash
• Auto negligence case against Billy Lane and Dodge set for trial
• Dodge answers auto negligence suit
• Judge accepts plea in Lane case sentencing scheduled for August
• Passenger in Billy Lane DUI Case files civil law suit