Skip to comments.Cop who fell on the job sues family of baby who almost drowned
Posted on 10/10/2007 9:40:10 AM PDT by Abathar
CASSELBERRY - In January, 1-year-old Joey Cosmillo wandered into the backyard and fell into the family pool. When his mother hauled him out, he wasn't breathing. Rescuers were able to bring him back to life, but he suffered severe brain damage and cannot walk, talk or even swallow.
Now, his family faces another burden: One of the rescuers, Casselberry police Sgt. Andrea Eichhorn, is suing, alleging the family left a puddle of water on the floor that afternoon, causing her to slip and fall.
The boy's grandparents, named in the suit, are mystified and angry.
"The loss we've suffered, and she's seeking money?" said Richard Cosmillo, 69, the boy's grandfather. "Of course there's going to be water in the house. He was sopping wet when we brought him in."
Eichhorn last week sued Richard Cosmillo; his wife, Maggie Cosmillo; and the boy's mother, Angela Cosmillo, accusing them of negligence. They were careless, according to the suit, and allowed the home they shared to become unsafe.
As a consequence, Eichhorn broke her knee, something that kept her off the job for two months, according to police Chief John Pavlis.
Joey now lives in a nursing home five miles away, where he gets 24-hour care. He breathes through one tube. He's fed through another.
"He doesn't have any abilities -- any," his grandmother said. "He can't sit. He can't swallow. He can't eat. We're not even sure he can see." and Richard Cosmillo are the boy's legal guardians. For the first two months after the accident, she remained at his bedside, never once going home.
(Excerpt) Read more at orlandosentinel.com ...
on the other thread, the first couple of posts are about the officer.
the threads then go on to focus on that particular actor repsectively.
that is my empirical research for the day. i just found it interesting. i am not sure which one is lower. if the cop's job isn't paying all the bills (which it should!) then i can't blame the cop for wanting her bills covered. but not in this way.
I havn’t been in FL since the mid 80s, and that was on the panhandle (Destin area)for diving.
AK doesn’t allow billboards, so at least this far, we have been spared that pain.
My guess is some scumbag lawyer is going for a settlement that's cheaper than the costs to insurance company (ie. paying its lawyers) for defend the suit. This cop will likely get $10-20K.
This is truly twisted.
Cry me a f***ing river. Not enough??? I sense an affirmitive action hire here. I personally think we should have a National Bitch Slap Day. Oh heck make it a week. The premise is obvious. On that one week out of the year one can bitch slap obviously cretinous moronic retromigent pond scum like this waste of oxygen.
God please look after the real victim in this farce. The poor child.
I wish people would read the whole article; the grandparents own the pool in their backyard; they were not at home at the time; the mother of the baby was at home when he slipped out; the grandparents have legal custody and make regular visits to see the little boy; 911 was called by the mother after she jumped in and pulled him out of the water; the reason he is in the assisted facility isn’t specified as opposed to home care but might be a requirement of previous agreements between insurers and health care personnel.
Only the officer’s lawyer said anything about the pool not meeting safety requirements.
I have done so. The facts speak for themselves - the fact that the child went in the water on his own is evidence that the pool was not properly childproofed. And if you put your child into a situation like that, you have a responsibility to make sure they are supervised at all times.
I didn't notice from the story that the child had a father. Did I miss something there?
Current codes do require that a pool built in Florida have either a automatic cover or that all doors and/or windows opening into the pool area have alarms or that a barrier be built around the pool. In addition any fencing around the property which has a pool must meet minimum height and material standards, as well as having self latching lockable gates.
However there is nothing in the code that requires a pool be retrofitted and alarms get disconnected, barrier taken down and no parent can be everywhere at once. Even with the best precautions accidents happen. That is why reason the sliding glass door to my in law’s pool has a nail lock well above child reach and why the screen patio doors have latches at the top of the door.
Our children also learned that should they step onto the pool patio without one of us they got a very quick spanking. No lecture, no time out, I wanted them to know I was serious. Better a sore butt than a dead child.
There is nothing childproof; the case is based on the water present in the house on the floor not on the access to the pool.
Nowhere in the article was it stated that the pool and its surroundings were in violation of the applicable standards.
The father wasn’t present one assumes, his presence now would make a good story to see how the suit might affect all parties.
So if the locality has weak standards, you aren't responsible for your child?
There is nothing childproof
A deadbolt lock in the door, with the key not present isn't childproof? A gate with a latch at least 48 inches from the ground won't keep out a one year old? My, your children must have been really advanced at that age. An old fashioned hook and eye latch on the door would be effective for most one year olds. (There's a reason most of the pool drownings are in the 3 - 5 year age group.)
Some years ago the 3 year old son of a family friend drowned. There were latches above child level on the pool access doors. While his mom was napping, the child awoke climbed out of bed, pulled a chair up to the door, unlocked the door and got out to the pool area. He was found no more than 10 minutes later.
She had no reason to think he was old enough to figure out how the latch worked and how to move a chair so he could reach it. Accidents happen.
Workman’s comp isn’t the jackpot. The cop wants the jackpot.
In the case you give, it does appear that the parents took reasonable precautions. As I noted above, most of these cases involve 3 to 5 year olds.
Now, if you told me that a one year old had done that, I probably wouldn’t believe the story.
But your child can always do one more thing than you think they can. That’s why you can’t rely on passive measures.
No, their herd is just to big for the environment to support, they need a good culling.
We might want to consider the possibility that workman's comp is refusing to pay unless this avenue is explored first.
This lawsuit seems so out of line, that this is the only reasonable explanation I can come up with.
Getting her medical bills paid and drawing a paycheck while unable to work isn't enough for her?
That sounds like a horrible situation. I wonder if they figured the punk didn't have money to pay damages with anyway?
either that, or it was because i wanted a reasonable amount- wasn’t looking for a lawsuit lottery, i just didn’t think it fair that we were out money because some jerk off drove drunk.
Ah, the heroes in blue once again show what they’re made of.