Woman suing Google over walking directions after she was hit by a car

A woman is suing Google for providing unsafe walking directions while she was in Utah. Lauren Rosenberg of Northridge, California, filed the lawsuit against Google on Thursday asking for over $100,000 in the U.S. District Court in Utah. The driver of the car that hit her was also named in the suit.

Rosenberg used her phone to get walking directions to her destination. The directions led her to a four-lane road that did not have any sidewalks. She said the road was "not reasonably safe for pedestrians." Though she didn't feel the road was safe she believed she could reach a sidewalk if she continued forward. She attempted to cross the road and was hit by a car.

The accident caused multiple bone fractures that required six weeks of rehabilitation. She is seeking compensation for her medical bills, lost wages and punitive damages. Her lawyer, Allen Young said, "We think there's enough fault to go around, but Google had some responsibility to direct people correctly or warn them. They created a trap with walking instructions that people rely on. She relied on it and thought she should cross the street."

Google spokeswoman Elaine Filadelfo told NPR that they have not received a copy of the lawsuit so they couldn't discuss it. But she did dispute the assertion that Rosenberg did not receive a warning that the walking directions may be missing sidewalks or pedestrian paths. She said that every software version for desktop computers and mobile devices has had that disclaimer since Google Maps was launched in 2008.

Utah Park City police said that some segments of the road Rosenberg was on have sidewalks but not the stretch that she reached. The road has a walking path on the side that she attempted to reach before being hit by a car. Her lawyer said that the walking path was "totally snowpacked" and useless to pedestrians in January.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Steve Jobs comments on Flash, Google, Microsoft and lost iPhone at D8

Next Story

Hulu coming to Xbox Live?

140 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

aaaa. natural selection at its semi best. why semi? well it would only be at its best if it completely wiped her from the gene pool...(if you know what i mean ¬_¬)

thornz0 said,
....people like this, I wish they were just gone. All of them.

I agree. The day natural selection ceased to apply was the beginning of the end...

In Europe, we say: only in America. Here in Holland, such a claim would never ever reach a court. I don not think anyone would even be stupid enough to try it. YOU are responsible for this. Every parent teaches his or her child about traffic. And every school has traffic as a subject. At least here in Holland. One can easily see that such a situation is not the best place to as a pedestrian. Four lanes? In Holland, that would most certainly be a motorway, and those are prohibited for pedestrians.

This case won't even stand in court for a minute...terms of use reads:

"6. DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATIONS ON LIABILITY.
(a) GOOGLE AND ITS LICENSORS (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO TELE ATLAS AND ITS SUPPLIERS) MAKE NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES REGARDING THE ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY CONTENT OR THE PRODUCTS.
(b) SUBJECT TO SECTION 14.1 OF THE GOOGLE UNIVERSAL TERMS, GOOGLE AND ITS LICENSORS (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO TELE ATLAS AND ITS SUPPLIERS) DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES IN CONNECTION WITH THE CONTENT AND THE PRODUCTS, AND WILL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE OR LOSS RESULTING FROM YOUR USE OF THE CONTENT OR THE PRODUCTS."

http://www.google.com/intl/en_ALL/help/terms_maps.html

[quote=TokyoKiller said,]This case won't even stand in court for a minute...terms of use reads:

"6. DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATIONS ON LIABILITY.

Off course this is a clear case, but just quoting terms of use is not always enough to avoid a legal claim.

So, she got hit by a car. Regardless of walking directions, you look both ways before you walk across the street. This women is daft.

Also, Google Maps is a free service with a disclaimer. It's like some guy walking up to me on a sidewalk and asking for directions to the hospital because his child is sick. It's not my fault that the kid gets worse if I give him directions and he happens to get mauled by a dog.

She must have missed the part in the fine print where it states your IQ must be over that of a pencil.

"She was struck by a speeding car on a pitch-black night" and "the woman is a native of Northridge in her mid-20s and is unemployed." So it sounds like she's opportunistic trash. What a shocker. She probably did not even get walking directions from Google. That was probably cooked up after the fact.

Wow! Google's map does not have safe way meta data. It is a map... graph theory... shortest distance from point A to point B. People are responsible for realizing that it is not safe to cross a street. This is even worst then the person who suied McDonalds for spilling coffee on herself. Not that I'm women bashing, but not many high profile cases known to me have men involved. Correct me if I'm wrong. This is not good. I suppose if someone gets mugged they will blame Google too. Perhaps safety would be a nice feature, but people must take responsiblity for their own actions.

The sad thing is that this is going to settle out of court. The only thing I do admire this person for doing is not asking for a rediculous amount of money. I think 100 grand is reasonable considering she decided to cross the street and Google maps was not sending electric shocks to her brain controling her...

My guess is the "missing piece" in this is that she continued to play with her phone while she was walking.

If you can sue McDonald's for not warning customers that when you order a hot coffee you might in fact get a cup full of hot liquid... AND WIN... there's no reason why this woman won't win against Google. Hopefully they carry enough pocket change that day in court to pay up.

C_Guy said,
If you can sue McDonald's for not warning customers that when you order a hot coffee you might in fact get a cup full of hot liquid... AND WIN... there's no reason why this woman won't win against Google. Hopefully they carry enough pocket change that day in court to pay up.

No no no no and ... NO ! I strongly disagree with you.

C_Guy said,
If you can sue McDonald's for not warning customers that when you order a hot coffee you might in fact get a cup full of hot liquid... AND WIN... there's no reason why this woman won't win against Google. Hopefully they carry enough pocket change that day in court to pay up.

Not that tired crap again. The coffee that they served to her was dangerously hot, far too hot to even drink without suffering burns. You can't really compare that to some ignorant lemming walking in the middle of a highway because her gps told her to. If it had told her to walk off a cliff would she have done that too?

Edited by Rigby, Jun 2 2010, 7:43pm :

TRC said,

Not that tired crap again. The coffee that they served to her was dangerously hot, far too hot to even drink without suffering burns. You can't really compare that to some ignorant lemming walking in the middle of a highway because her gps told her to. If it had told her to walk off a cliff would she have done that too?

It was still a frivolous lawsuit. Come on, if it was that hot, she would have known it when she grabbed the cup. Styrofoam doesn't do that good of a job of masking how hot the liquid is inside of it. By the theory that it was far too hot to even drink, then it stands that McDonalds should have a policy where they make the coffee, take the pot off of the burner for a minimum of 5 minutes before they are allowed to serve that coffee. And after 5 minutes they can put it on a warmer that gets about half as hot as the coffee pot burner.

AlwaysSmilingGUY said,

It was still a frivolous lawsuit. Come on, if it was that hot, she would have known it when she grabbed the cup. Styrofoam doesn't do that good of a job of masking how hot the liquid is inside of it. By the theory that it was far too hot to even drink, then it stands that McDonalds should have a policy where they make the coffee, take the pot off of the burner for a minimum of 5 minutes before they are allowed to serve that coffee. And after 5 minutes they can put it on a warmer that gets about half as hot as the coffee pot burner.


i think the case was based around the fact that McDonald's was using cup lids they already knew to be faulty from prior incidents/testing.

AlwaysSmilingGUY said,

It was still a frivolous lawsuit. Come on, if it was that hot, she would have known it when she grabbed the cup. Styrofoam doesn't do that good of a job of masking how hot the liquid is inside of it. By the theory that it was far too hot to even drink, then it stands that McDonalds should have a policy where they make the coffee, take the pot off of the burner for a minimum of 5 minutes before they are allowed to serve that coffee. And after 5 minutes they can put it on a warmer that gets about half as hot as the coffee pot burner.

It does not matter if she could tell it was that hot or not, and I strongly disagree that you would be able to tell just by picking up the cup. They were criminally negligent for even serving it that hot to begin with. There had already been people burned by it in the past and they knew it was too hot. I hate frivolous lawsuits but that was not one.

C_Guy said,
If you can sue McDonald's for not warning customers that when you order a hot coffee you might in fact get a cup full of hot liquid... AND WIN... there's no reason why this woman won't win against Google. Hopefully they carry enough pocket change that day in court to pay up.

Expected of you.

Edited by dead.cell, Jun 2 2010, 10:15pm :

In a sense anyways, Northridge is more of a place where you have to get around by car rather than foot. It has a lot of highway style streets and traffic lights aren't all that common either. My aunt and uncle live there and I wonder if they know of this

hmm.. this is totally not google's fault. you have to excercise your best judgement in any situation regardless of the information your provided with.

netsendjoe said,
hmm.. this is totally not google's fault. you have to excercise your best judgement in any situation regardless of the information your provided with.

It would appear her best judgment is to sue for her being stupid.

she might win..... google's T&C should be placed on the page where you enter your starting and destination places even though it was her stupidity that got here hit. or at least when you first open up the google maps page before being able to access the map/directions

i can see it now. Google maps 2010 american edition.
Walk three paces,breathe in , walk three paces, breathe out. Blink, step off kerb,do not walk in front of a car...

cRuNcHiE said,
i can see it now. Google maps 2010 american edition.
Walk three paces,breathe in , walk three paces, breathe out. Blink, step off kerb,do not walk in front of a car...

lol

Ha, ha ........ha ha ha ha ha ha ha - you could not make up acts of stupidity as dumb as this if your life depended on it

Dopey 'kin mare!

Jumping of a bridge... that one made me laugh!
I dare Google to publish directions which include the crossing of the English/Manche Channel.

vvtunes said,
Jumping of a bridge... that one made me laugh!
I dare Google to publish directions which include the crossing of the English/Manche Channel.

Didn't they have "swim across the Atlantic" as part of their directions when going from the US to anywhere in Europe? At least in the early days of google maps/earth.

OrangeFTW said,
Looks like this woman deserves to be nominated for a Darwin Award! Too bad you have to be deceased for that

Well, if she keeps this sort of behaviour she'll very soon get her award.

Ha ha ha ha.

I wouldn't be able to be a lawyer. If my client came in one day and said, "I want to sue Google because their walking directions caused me to get hit by a car." I'd just stare at them and say, "Are you serious?" before showing them the door.
No one in their right mind would believe she could win this case, it's ridiculous.

The type of lawyer that takes this case is the type that gets paid regardless of whether they win or not lol. So with that, she's probably getting billed like crazy too. And she should be.

stevember said,
Jeeezs, I got walking direction to France, I'm suing because almost drowned walking across channel.

I got a walking route from Columbus, OH to Sydney, Australia. Here's a gem from the route:

552. Kayak 2,756 mi across the Pacific Ocean - Entering Hawaii
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=...urce=s_d&saddr=Columbus,+OH&daddr=Sydney,+Australia&hl=en&geocode=FVjCYQId9okN-ylx3pC5wYk4iDEztbHP-GYy5A%3BFX06-_0dyjwDCSlLWOFQOa4SazGiG_ayzb8_pw&mra=ls&dirflg=w&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=42.174768,84.375&ie=UTF8&ll=47.64692,-122.3387&spn=0.035157,0.082397&z=14

LAWSUIT WAITING TO HAPPEN!

Neb Okla said,

I got a walking route from Columbus, OH to Sydney, Australia. Here's a gem from the route:

552. Kayak 2,756 mi across the Pacific Ocean - Entering Hawaii
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=...urce=s_d&saddr=Columbus,+OH&daddr=Sydney,+Australia&hl=en&geocode=FVjCYQId9okN-ylx3pC5wYk4iDEztbHP-GYy5A%3BFX06-_0dyjwDCSlLWOFQOa4SazGiG_ayzb8_pw&mra=ls&dirflg=w&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=42.174768,84.375&ie=UTF8&ll=47.64692,-122.3387&spn=0.035157,0.082397&z=14

LAWSUIT WAITING TO HAPPEN!

lol

how the f*** can Google maps determine if the sidewalk/footpath is blocked by snow?
I hope she gets charged all court fees and reminded she really is stupid.

Exosphere said,
how the f*** can Google maps determine if the sidewalk/footpath is blocked by snow?

They could integrate weather data into their routes?

sounds like she walked onto the road (despite common sense) so that she could just sue google if anything would happen...

Anarkii said,
+1 for Darwins theroy.

Unfortunatly not, if anything -1 for Darwin's theory, damn medical help!

Edited by Tom Ferguson, Jun 2 2010, 10:41am :

EJocys said,
+1, Google could advance evolution by directing these human lemings to cliffs.

LOL!!!!
+70 (i'm in office and i shared this to everybody).

This is a clear example of Darwins Theory to be a failure

GetUsed2It said,
next time i hope she dies! i hate stupid people!

Are you saying that you have never had a stupid moment in your life?
very interesting!!!

Nicholas P. said,

Are you saying that you have never had a stupid moment in your life?
very interesting!!!

No, no, one thing is having a stupid moment, and another thing is being stupid and trying to blame your stupidity on other individuals and try to get money off of it

GetUsed2It said,
next time i hope she dies! i hate stupid people!

Regardless of stupidity, it is plain cruel to wish upon someone's death. Think about what you said for a moment, what if it was someone close to you?

burnsflipper said,

Regardless of stupidity, it is plain cruel to wish upon someone's death.

Cruel? She would have suffered less. He's being humane.

Nicholas P. said,

Are you saying that you have never had a stupid moment in your life?
very interesting!!!

Either you can't read or your stupid - he said "next time i hope she dies! i hate stupid people!"

Now on a serious note - Everyone one has a stupid moment - She is GREEDY

Nicholas P. said,

Are you saying that you have never had a stupid moment in your life?
very interesting!!!

i had, and since it was MY stupid moment, as you've said, i havent sued anyone! thats the bottom line!

PS: OK, i guess, maybe she shouldn't 'die'..

burnsflipper said,

Regardless of stupidity, it is plain cruel to wish upon someone's death. Think about what you said for a moment, what if it was someone close to you?

noone close to me would follow blindly a gps app and when got hit, sue a company.. especially when the app itself says 'be cautios while using the app'.

next time she should close here eyes, and start driving simply by following the voice instructions! ppl like that will hit ME one day on the sidewalk!

From Google themselves:

Walking directions are in beta.
Use caution - This route may be missing sidewalks or pedestrian paths.

This sums it all up. Stupid woman.

Billus said,
From Google themselves:

Walking directions are in beta.
Use caution - This route may be missing sidewalks or pedestrian paths.

This sums it all up. Stupid woman.

That's actually really funny as I just tried to get directions from my location to another and it stats the same thing Big bold letters with bright yellow background just above the walking directions themselves!

Oh! It also states this!

"These directions are for planning purposes only. You may find that construction projects, traffic, weather, or other events may cause conditions to differ from the map results, and you should plan your route accordingly. You must obey all signs or notices regarding your route"

Hmm no side walks?! Don't walk down it.. No pedestrian crossing? Don't walk down it!

Looks like this will be thrown out due to Google being smarter than the average woman looking to file a suit.

Billus said,
From Google themselves:

Walking directions are in beta.
Use caution - This route may be missing sidewalks or pedestrian paths.

This sums it all up. Stupid woman.


Screenshot?

Morphine-X said,

Looks like this will be thrown out due to Google being smarter than the average woman looking to file a suit.

I wouldn't call her the "average" woman... she's just plain dumb

Billus said,
Walking directions are in beta.
Use caution - This route may be missing sidewalks or pedestrian paths.

Bing Walking directions have a similar disclaimer on the website - and also lack the warning on the mobile app.

Morphine-X said,

Hmm no side walks?! Don't walk down it.. No pedestrian crossing? Don't walk down it!

I saw a photo of the accident site - there was a small dirt path to the side of the road.

State laws are different, but in Ohio, pedestrians may use all roadways unless otherwise prohibited - and bicycles are entitled to a full lane since they are a "vehicle" under the law. Pedestrians must walk facing traffic - so you can see if oncoming traffic might hit you and try to get out of the way. Bicycles are required to travel in the same direction as traffic.

I see people walking and riding bikes on busy US and State routes all the time. I think Stephen King was even hit while walking along a road - not sure that it's State/Federal funding matters when you're laying in the ditch with broken bones.

To me it's amusing that we are told that drivers licenses exist to ensure that all drivers meet a minimum set of standards. In reality the roads are a sort of system of "conventions" that we agree to - regardless of the law. A police officer friend of mine said that a significant number of people on the road are unlicensed or have suspended licenses - so it's amazing that it works as well as it does - but don't be fooled that licensing and drivers education is a safety training issue.

For one, the laws are always changing so glossing over them once at age 16 is insufficient for that purpose. The real reason behind drivers licensing and registration is an excuse for another tax.

Morphine-X said,

That's actually really funny as I just tried to get directions from my location to another and it stats the same thing Big bold letters with bright yellow background just above the walking directions themselves!

Oh! It also states this!

"These directions are for planning purposes only. You may find that construction projects, traffic, weather, or other events may cause conditions to differ from the map results, and you should plan your route accordingly. You must obey all signs or notices regarding your route"

Hmm no side walks?! Don't walk down it.. No pedestrian crossing? Don't walk down it!

Looks like this will be thrown out due to Google being smarter than the average woman looking to file a suit.

Don't count on it being thrown out. Remember she's suing in America.... The same country that let a woman sue (and win) against McDonald's for burning her mouth on hot coffee.....

(And yes, I live in America, but I still think it's stupidity at it's finest, and it makes me NOT proud)

AlwaysSmilingGUY said,

Don't count on it being thrown out. Remember she's suing in America.... The same country that let a woman sue (and win) against McDonald's for burning her mouth on hot coffee.....

(And yes, I live in America, but I still think it's stupidity at it's finest, and it makes me NOT proud)

//Agreed, I live here too and its down right embarrassing.. I walked into the grocery store today for food. Walked down the sweets aisle to get to the freezer section and I sware the entire aisle was empty of sweets. Like 1 or two things were remaining.. Made my gut twist =/

Billus said,
From Google themselves:

Walking directions are in beta.
Use caution - This route may be missing sidewalks or pedestrian paths.

This sums it all up. Stupid woman.

Was about to post this. If you can't read the disclaimer, then...

Pauleh said,
Only in America.

very true, on the other hand it forces companies to maintain high standards and reduces the involvement of government as the companies are sued private.

Edited by Borix, Jun 2 2010, 10:59am :

thetoaster3 said,
Silly woman. Whatever happened to common sense?

What common sense? That barely exists the way it did before the tech-era. Common-sense today involves "googling" results to any given question or inquiry.

Personally, I think the women was a complete bafoon for not looking where she was going. It just comes to show that technology isn't necessarily a helpful nowadays. It can be if used properly, but seeing all the news of ppl misusing tech, it pummels the purpose and efficiency.

thetoaster3 said,
Silly woman. Whatever happened to common sense?

Watch Idiocracy! I swear that movie is like a prediction of the future of mankind...

thetoaster3 said,
Silly woman. Whatever happened to common sense?

Watch Idiocracy! I swear that movie is like a prediction of the future of mankind...

"Though she didn't feel the road was safe" And yet you went ahead and walked down it, well it's your fault for being dim I'm afraid.

thealexweb said,
"Though she didn't feel the road was safe" And yet you went ahead and walked down it, well it's your fault for being dim I'm afraid.

+1 to be honest People should use common sense.
*facepalm*

thealexweb said,
"Though she didn't feel the road was safe" And yet you went ahead and walked down it, well it's your fault for being dim I'm afraid.

Ever wonder why in the US you have these disclaimers and instructions on everything? Because common sense is not something people use, and if there is not something on paper, you'll get sued for it, no matter how dumb or stupid it is.

thealexweb said,
"Though she didn't feel the road was safe" And yet you went ahead and walked down it, well it's your fault for being dim I'm afraid.

Also, Google never claims that any of the roads there are safe.

Northgrove said,

Also, Google never claims that any of the roads there are safe.

True, I am pretty sure Google Maps does not require yuo to blindfold yourself and trust it.

thealexweb said,
"Though she didn't feel the road was safe" And yet you went ahead and walked down it, well it's your fault for being dim I'm afraid.

Well, this is why we have juries. They're supposed to look at the facts and see if the person's conduct made sense. If Google routed her over a cliff would she have followed it?

Unfortunately judges have started to try to manipulate juries - laying down strict ground rules for which conclusions they may come to or which remedies they may dole out. Luckily there's a group fighting for more freedom for juries to do what's right: http://fija.org

Interestingly, two FIJA activists were recently arrested because illegal rules have been made to restrict free speech in front of Federal Courthouses. Hopefully they get FIJA juries in their cases.

thealexweb said,
"Though she didn't feel the road was safe" And yet you went ahead and walked down it, well it's your fault for being dim I'm afraid.

sometimes i think they should remove warning labels from everything and let natural selection do its thing.

tablet_user said,

sometimes i think they should remove warning labels from everything and let natural selection do its thing.

+1.... Warning labels made those people stop thinking, and hence these stupid lawsuits.

thealexweb said,
"Though she didn't feel the road was safe" And yet you went ahead and walked down it, well it's your fault for being dim I'm afraid.

Yea really wtf, my gps have in a few cases (like at ferry landings, roads can be a little messy there, specially on the map) directed me into one way way, from the wrong direction, so i should just continues even though something is obviously wrong and then just blame the TomTom if something happens? wow

Mind Bender said,

+1 to be honest People should use common sense.
*facepalm*

But, why should I use common sense, when I can sue???? (note the sarcasm in this please, as I think that she should LOSE and have to pay Google's attorney fees for a frivolous lawsuit).

thealexweb said,
"Though she didn't feel the road was safe" And yet you went ahead and walked down it, well it's your fault for being dim I'm afraid.

+1!
She was probably thinking to herself "this looks dangerous, I might get a lawsuite out of it"

thealexweb said,
"Though she didn't feel the road was safe" And yet you went ahead and walked down it, well it's your fault for being dim I'm afraid.

+1 *Facepalm*