if there was warning around like traffic cones and signs of construction then no she cant sue but if it was just a random open one then probably yes

Anyone stupid enough to fall into a hole that size deserves what she gets. It's not that hard to OPEN HER EYES and look around herself. She's lucky she didn't run into a mugger or rapist.

So many factors we need to know first. Was there a sign or barricade, or any other warnings? Was it dark? Where did it happen? Why was it uncovered? We would need all the details to make an accurate assessment.

There should be a law against people being able to sue for their own stupidity. If she can't walk and chew bubble gum at the same time she better stop and do one or the other. What if she was driving her car on her cell phone and didn't notice the bridge was out or the 6 year old kid on his tricycle? Suing for your own stupidity is just wrong.

If there was a sign next to the manhole and she ignored it, she has no case. If there was no sign, she might have simply not noticed it even if she wasn't texting.

Sue who? Her parents for raising a stupid ass child?

hopefully not, but people have sued for dumber reasons and won...

well if the cover was off without any tape or marking she can sue, I don't think it's right, but someone will always be liable for injury/damage

Yes - sue. Spend years in courts, spend millions, lose the case, ordered to pay expenses of who ever she sued - lose her house, car and the phone which survived the fall but she can no longer afford. Now, now she learned a lesson, maybe. +5

Even if she is part guilty (I am a lawyer,btw)for not pain attention,she can sue because that hole should be covered! You want believe but the same thing happend in my country in the night but that girl didn't make it...

Whoever is responsible for the open manhole cover should be prosecuted - what if a blind person had come along?

She may have a case against the people responsible for managing the manhole, but a case against the mobile phone provider would be weak. (Courts are getting a little tired of cases that arise simply because somebody is not prudent.) The lawyer representing her may try to minimize the fact that she was texting, and claim that the manhole was an unsafe hazard. The argument might be that somebody might just have easily fallen in because it was dark. People in the street are distracted for all sorts of reasons, and texting is just one of them. In my humble opinion, there may be a case here, but we need more facts.

Well, apparently the open manhole was not marked or barricaded as it should have been, so they have a case. But it should be a lesson to compulsive texters everywhere.

it would depend on a couple of factors, 1st, wither she was watching where she was going or not doesn't really matter, what if she was blind. that said, who removed the manhole cover? city workers or vandals? 2nd, if city workers removed the cover, what steps did they take to ensure this wouldn't happen? a traffic cone or two? a saw horse barrier? caution tape? normally when city workers remove a man hole cover they will surround the open hole on three sides with a physical barrier with the fourth side facing their truck so this kind of accident won't happen. if city workers removed the cover and did not take proper safety precautions then sue their @$$es off!

Assuming premises liability in Virginia is similar to California, it would probably be worth your while. The city or county has the duty to keep public conditions safe. You can't leave a manhole uncovered without setting up barricades and orange streamers; whatever it takes for people to realize that they created a dangerous condition. Since a governmental entity will be involved you will have to file a tort claim prior to filing a lawsuit. The man really sticks it to you with these deadlines. Sometimes as short as 6 months, so she better find someone. You can call the State Bar Association for a referral.

Interesting... the council or department responsible for uncovering it has a big responsibility here. However, the girl has her own personal responsibility too. She wasn't looking, it was ultimately her fault. She should not sue. However, the department responsible needs to get in big trouble for this. Somebody else could have been seriously hurt, someone less able to prevent themselves from falling.

well, if there weren't any traffic cones or caution tape or whatever, then yeah i would prolly sue, but then again if there was and she is just that stupid to walk into an f'ing manhole then that's her problem, not the state's. she could of always stopped walking for the 20 seconds it would have taken her to text someone! :-)

She should get some compensation. Not as much as if she was paying attention but still...an open manhole...a little kid could have fell in...

yes sue but dont go overboard asking for millions

just do it!

sorry but serves her right, she wasn't blind or impaired in any way... just stupid

the open manhole needs to be held 'accountable'...but then so does she in her 'stipidity'... so, i say, NO ....no money... both parties should be grateful and both should PAY MORE ATTENTION IN THE FUTURE.... they should rope off before opening and she should not be walking and texting.......

Why sue when her own carelessness also caused her injury.She didn't die and she didn't pay attention in her surroundings.

From what I've seen of the facts added in the other answers, I'd believe that there was comparative liability here. 1- The workers should have first placed safety cones, barricades or whatever and then opened the manhole. Since the girl wasn't paying attention, she probably would have missed them or tripped over them anyway, but the it would totally be her fault. 2- The girl is responsible for looking where she is walking. She isn't blind, she just needs to pay attention. She could have also walked into a tree, car, blind person, child in a stroller, etc.

both parties should be held accountable, if she is going to sue it should just me for her doctor bills, she is not laid up in a bed suffering and that is that these kids today between there phones and there ipods. Granted the man hole should of been taped off something, but she should of been payin attention.

It was not a smart move on her part. It was also not a smart move on the governments part for having an open manhole. No matter, the bottom line are her injuries. The government will pay for her medical bills, but suing is out of the question. Both parties are at fault.

It sounds as though the workers were negligent for not marking off the open manhole. But the girl was also negligent for texting and not looking where she was going. If I were the judge I would fine the company in charge of the workers, and would tell the girl to be more careful in future.

The party who left the manhole open and unmarked created an unsafe condition for which they should be held accountable. The accountability attributed to the manhole people is ameliorated by the principle of contributory negligence insofar as the texter should have been looking at her path.

I say both acts cancel each other out. The manhole should have been covered, but the girl should have been watching where she was going.

to sue - okay she was stoopid to be unaware of where she was walking, but at the same time, it could have been a kiddy or an elderly person with partial sight or even blind!

I don't know what law is like where u are.. but from what I know, it doesnt matter that she was texting. She could have been walking on her hands blindfolded, but the bottom line is the manhole is usually required to be covered lawfully for these such reasons.

It's not like the sidewalk caved in. By 15, you should know to pay attention to where you're going. New York has gotten obnoxious because so many people don't know how to do walk in a city anymore.

if the manhole was covered properly then she is at fault if not the law is so stupid that she might win. but regardless she was not paying attention it was her fault. if she wins then this world is coming to an end.

Not sue - try looking where you are going! This culture of suing really irritates me. There was a girl here who was walking along the top of a wall in a park - she claims she thought it was a path - and she fell off the end of it and broke her back. She won, if I recall, a six figure sum in compensation because she claimed the drop should have been properly labelled. Now I'm sorry she broke her back, but take some personal responsibility. Where I live, there is a path down the side of the river. At the edge of the path there is no barrier but the path runs along the top of a wall, with a drop of about 8 foot down to the water. Once upon a time, the wall had a barrier to prevent you falling in, but that was taken down for the iron during WWII. One day I was walking with my mother in the evening when it was dark, and I walked off the edge of the wall and fell into the river. Now fortunately I wasn't injured, but I could easily have been. That is a very fast flowing river, when I fell in there had been a drought and the water was only about 6 inches deep, but normally it is several feet and quite a few people have drowned in it in other places. At another time of year, I WOULD have drowned. What if I had hurt myself? Should I have sued the council for not providing a barrier at the side of a public footpath? I don't think so. I'm sorry but I fell in because my mother was ahead of me and she was the one with the torch, and I wasn't paying attention. Therefore, the blame lies with ME. If you weren't looking where you were going and fell down a manhole, that is your own fault.

Whether the city sues her depends on how much damage she did to the manhole !!!!

I saw the news clip on that as well. the city was at fault because they opened the man hole cover then left it unattended causing a hazard. The Girl texting had a responsibility to watch where she was walking and any obsticals she may encounter. As usual however the law will come down in favor of the girl and she will gain possible millions because it is a city she is sueing. And the lawyers will get a fat chunk of what ever she gets. Why does this country allow for peoples stupidity? Why don't people have any common since any longer? In this case both the girl and the workers!

OSHA regulation apply suit is viable, an open manhole is to have an observer topside.