Frisco's Erin Brockovich Update = Defeated

By Richie Whitt Mon., Apr. 27 2009 at 2:00 PM

Categories: When Bad Things Happen To Good People

Pin It

Got a call over the weekend from Charmane Jackson, who lost her legal fight against golf manufacturing giant U.S. Kids Friday in Sherman.

After a week of testimony the jury deliberated only 90 minutes before failing to find U.S. Kids responsible for the death of 12-year-old Chandler Jackson.

Asked if the jury found U.S. Kids responsible for the breakage of the club, the foreman read "No."

Asked if the jury found U.S. Kids responsible for Chandler's death, the foreman read "No."

Asked if the jury found Chander Jackson's actions responsible, the foreman read "Yes."

Said a devastated Charmane, "We're in shock."

So sketchy was the company about its case that U.S. Kids offered to settle before the trial. But in the end - with no witnesses as to what really happened that day in a Kentucky ditch - the jury decided not to blame a company for what it's deemed an individual freak accident.

Guess not all admirable sojourns have Hollywood endings.

Like this Story?

Sign up for the Weekly Newsletter: Our weekly feature stories, movie reviews, calendar picks and more - minus the newsprint and sent directly to your inbox.

Tags:

Chandler Jackson, golf

Write Comment

Email to Friend

Print Article

Related Content

More About:

Hey Michael! Were you a juror in this case? If not, why did you sit through the whole trial? I'm looking for someone to talk to about the facts of the case. Please email me if you get this. sflemmons@sbcglobal.net
Hey Michael! Were you a juror in this case? If not, why did you sit through the whole trial? I'm looking for someone to talk to about the facts of the case. Please email me if you get this. sflemmons@sbcglobal.net
As the mother of Chandler Hugh Jackson who died a tragic death at age 12, I want to let all of you know that this law suit was not about money. US Kids tried to settle before trail with money only and we declined. We asked them to start testing their clubs and take the shafts that my son was golfing with off the market...They DECLINED. To this day, the clubs that they are selling have never been tested, even after my son's death. There have been many returns of shafts breaking and clubs flying off, which they tried to hide from the Consumer Protection Agency. Our experts found that there was a fracture in the 9 iron where it broke 4" from the club, they also found a design defect and the shaft metal didn't even meet industry standards, SAE-4135 steel. May I also add Dan Van Horn, owner of US Kids, didn't even know what kind of metal these clubs were made of until our experts tested them. My son was having "one of the Best Days of his Life" his favorite quote. He just went to go get his ball and either triped or leaned on the club to pick up his ball when there was a loud snap and a cry for help. My son was laying there with blood shooting from his throat, he was impaled. He was no where near a tree according to the District Attorney in KY, who was golfing and one of the first person's to get to my son's aide. He knew my son well and was 100% confident that my son did nothing wrong. Bottom-line US Kids buys from China, doesn't test them, doesn't even know what kind of metal he is getting. Would you take a chance and buy your kids these clubs? If I can save one childs life and save a family the unbearalbe pain and suffereing, then this fight was worth it. Please feel free to go to my website and read the story that Richie wrote "Only The Good Die Young" then you will know why our hearts are shattered forever. www.chandlersfoundation.org
Interesting concept...someone dies a tragic death and the family doesn't get rich...whodathunkit?
Sat through the whole trial. Can't imagine how hard it is to hear that your 12 year old child is 100% (the jury's words) at fault for his death. The case was too tough for the Plaintiff's to overcome the fact that there were no witnesses. After that you have competing experts and a bunch of other stuff that just fills in the speculation. The defense did their job of defending the companies. Both sides did a good job. But in the end there were no witnesses to what happened.
If you say so, in which case, I'm halfway sorry about the jab. You wouldn't know why or how you arrived at your opinion based on your two stories about the case. I'm trying to be with Team Whitt, but I'm having a hard time figuring out the reason we're mad.
@Christopher: Rather than a sophomoric assumption, I'd call it an educated, researched opinion. But thanks for the feedback.
@Whitt - That may be but it doesn't sound in the article as if you gave much thought to the fact that someone else might. Even the "Erin Brockovich" title seems to imply something noble about Mrs. Jackson's case, pre and post court decision. Personally, I don't know the details and unfortunately it doesn't some like anyone knows the exact sequence of events leading to the injury. You have to feel terrible for the mother/family but I also happen to know of more than a few cases (one through a close acquaintance) where a broken club has resulted in a bleeding death. That danger could be inherent in the basic design of all golf clubs, U.S. Kids or not: if you use any golf club inappropriately or roughly, it could break cause serious injury or death--often to the neck. It could also be that U.S. Kids was using metal that they knew was insufficient or that they were well aware of that danger with this particular club. If so, that's certainly be something that I'd figure to be interesting to the court and also to a reader. I just find that assumption sophomoric without any other details being offered.
@Christopher: I wouldn't settle if I was innocent, but that's just me. And for the record, I've objectively read the depositions. You'd think their defense was sketchy as well.
"So sketchy was the company about its case that U.S. Kids offered to settle before the trial" Really?!? Wouldn't most companies rather settle privately rather than have to pay the legal fees necessary to defend their product, at the risk of being found negligent and having to pay for damages anyway, even if they didn't believe their product was at fault? I think you are making a curious assertion here assuming fault just because a company is trying to settle. Poor form. If you know the facts that are "sketchy" in the U.S. Kid's case then wouldn't those be interesting to put in this article? A face-value this sentence is just ridiculous and doesn't appear to be at all objective.