Frivilious Lawsuits:12-5-03 Woman trampled unconcious for DVD player deal at Wal-Mart has done stunt before!

[dmcowen674]

10-18-2003 Pat Sajak Sued For Bearhug

A 38-year-old Lorton man is suing the company that produces "Wheel Of Fortune" for $2 million. During an October 2000 taping at DC's Constitution Hall, host Pat Sajak (right) gave the man a backbreaking bearhug after he'd just won $48,400. The 5-foot-7, 153-pound man has since had back surgery and months of painful rehabilitation. Details in the Post. Sajak has a home in Maryland, where he owns several radio stations including WNAV in Annapolis.....

 

[dmcowen674]

10-22-2003 Parents Sue Sony & Walmart Over Grand Theft Auto Game Linked to Shooting

KNOXVILLE, Tenn. - A $246 million lawsuit was filed against the designer, marketer and a retailer of the video game series "Grand Theft Auto" by the families of two people shot by teenagers apparently inspired by the game.

The boys told investigators they got the rifles from a locked room in their home and decided to randomly shoot at tractor-trailer rigs, just like in the video game "Grand Theft Auto III."

In a suit filed Monday in Cocke County Circuit Court on behalf of the victims, Miami lawyer Jack Thompson and local lawyer Richard Talley alleged the game "inspires and trains players to shoot at vehicles and persons."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here we go again, let's not blame the kids, let's not blame the parents, let's blame it on the Video game and let's blame it on Guns. The Game and the Guns pulled the trigger.

 

[JohnnyMcJohnnyJohn]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: PainTrain

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: PainTrain

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Orsorum
CkG - that is not the end of discussion, and you know it. If you can't argue any further than "she's dumb", then stop arguing period.

Does hot coffee burn - yes. I'm not saying action wasn't warranted - it's just that this lady was responsible for spilling the coffee on herself. The coffee was 20degrees over the AVERAGE, even if it would have been 165deg - she still would have been burned. SHE was responsible for spilling the coffee - PERIOD. Until people start taking personal responsibility for their own actions - these sort of things will keep spinning out of control. Should McDonalds have lowered their temp -sure, but that old woman was still "dumb" and was 100% responsible for spilling her coffee.
Yes it is the end of the discussion because it's been hashed and rehashed here before and some people just can't(won't) see the personal responsibility side of the equation.

Are we going to start selling dull knives at the store so the manufacturer isn't responsible for someone cutting themselves? Think about it.

CkG

Holy geez, you've got something fierce against "dumb" people eh? I suppose if the planet were as smart as you, it woudn't accidentally burn itself with hot coffee. But does that imply everyone would substantiate their arguments with name calling or am I just "dumb" for asking?

You think it's right that the rest of the world should suffer because of the acts of "dumb" people? Bullsh1t.
What are you the Mother Theresa for the Dumb?

Perhaps I'm just not blinded by an overwhelming sense of insecurity with regard to my intelligence (or lack thereof) like some people in this thread appear to be.

Insecurity? JohnnyJohnjohn is that you? Why you be hiding behind the pain?

CkG

Ack! You got me!

 

[JohnnyMcJohnnyJohn]

Oh and I'm at work Remember I told you about that.

 

[lozina]

All this talk of hot coffee is driving me insane. I need to get home FAST and fire up a pot

 

[roboninja]

Extraordinarily stupid lawsuit, doomed to failure. No lawsuit of this kind has ever been won, 'nuff said.

 

[tk149]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
They broke the law, they paid for it.

Please explain exactly what LAW they broke. Neither of the links posted, nor anything I remember reading about the case stated that they broke the law.

 

[Bleep]

The now Infamous McDonalds Hot Coffee Lawsuit - I'm surprised we all don't have to endure being served cold Coffee.

For all the statements made about this case it was thrown out on appeal.

 

[RobCur]

Is all about $$$, 246 million is way too much to ask for their irresponsibility. for 1-2 million they might win their case just like with mcdonald hot coffee. oh well, this is getting stupidier all the time. laughable at best, LMAO!

 

[Tab]

She is a stupid lady, what kind of idiot puts hot coffefe in between thier legs?

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: Bleep

The now Infamous McDonalds Hot Coffee Lawsuit - I'm surprised we all don't have to endure being served cold Coffee.

For all the statements made about this case it was thrown out on appeal.

Incorrect. On appeal the judgement was lowered to I believe $300,000 to cover medical costs and lost pay at work. McDonals was liable, if they hadnt of ignored the health inspector citations they would not have lost the case.

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: tk149

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
They broke the law, they paid for it.

Please explain exactly what LAW they broke. Neither of the links posted, nor anything I remember reading about the case stated that they broke the law.

They didnt break the law, but put themselves in the position of being liable, as they were warned by health inspectors THREE times that their coffee was above the acceptable temp for human consumption.

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
10-22-2003 Parents Sue Sony & Walmart Over Grand Theft Auto Game Linked to Shooting

KNOXVILLE, Tenn. - A $246 million lawsuit was filed against the designer, marketer and a retailer of the video game series "Grand Theft Auto" by the families of two people shot by teenagers apparently inspired by the game.

The boys told investigators they got the rifles from a locked room in their home and decided to randomly shoot at tractor-trailer rigs, just like in the video game "Grand Theft Auto III."

In a suit filed Monday in Cocke County Circuit Court on behalf of the victims, Miami lawyer Jack Thompson and local lawyer Richard Talley alleged the game "inspires and trains players to shoot at vehicles and persons."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here we go again, let's not blame the kids, let's not blame the parents, let's blame it on the Video game and let's blame it on Guns. The Game and the Guns pulled the trigger.

This case will be tossed out just like the others.

 

[chess9]

Cadguy:

You are woefully uninformed. This topic was discussed thoroughly here about two years ago. If you are truly interested in enlightenment, I'd suggest you dredge up the discussion. Trust me, the coffee case is an urban legend continually fostered by the ignorant who think we'd be better off with a Fascist government offering no private enterprise to lawyers. Lawyers are bad, but there are worse evils. Stupidity comes to mind....
-Robert

 

[chess9]

Yes, it is a truly stupid case. But look what harm those video games have done to our boys. <sniff> I see it every day here at AT. Very sad, indeed. Can't tell a Schmucker from a ****er. A fruit from a flamingo.... And my parents were worried when they learned I'd tried grass....

-Robert

 

[yellowperil]

Originally posted by: Bleep

The now Infamous McDonalds Hot Coffee Lawsuit - I'm surprised we all don't have to endure being served cold Coffee.

For all the statements made about this case it was thrown out on appeal.

Actually it wasn't, the judgment still stands. What the judge did was order a remittur, which basically reduces the damages awarded to the plaintiff.

On one hand, a plaintiff shouldn't be allowed to gain a windfall from a court judgment. On the other hand, reducing the judgment lowers the 'punishment' aspect out of punitive damages. The whole purpose of punitive damages is to sting the defendant in his pocketbook and make him think twice about doing the bad deed again. Not that $2.X million would have dented McDonald's much anyway, but perhaps the $ could have been used for some better purpose.

So in the end McDonalds' wins in the public mind's eye. People focus on the greedy, ignorant plaintiff rather than the large corporate defendant who was negligent in not fixing their product defect and failing their duty to warn. For $400K I think it was money well spent by McDonald's for advertising and goodwill.

 

[dmcowen674]

11-8-2003 Illegal Immigrant Workers Sue Wal-Mart

Nine illegal immigrants who worked as janitors at Wal-Mart until they were arrested during federal raids last month have sued the company, accusing it of discrimination.

The nine say they were paid lower wages and offered fewer benefit because they are Mexicans, and they accuse Wal-Mart and its cleaning contractors of failing to pay for overtime, withhold taxes or make required workers' compensation contributions.

According to the lawsuit, Wal-Mart employed cleaning contractors "with full knowledge" that they paid illegal immigrants less than legal workers.

"Wal-Mart must have known about these violations," the immigrant's lawyer, Gilberto Garcia, told The New York Times. "If these people are going to work at Wal-Marts, then Wal-Mart and its contractors should abide by the labor laws."
---------------------------------------------------------
This more idiotic nonsense and mockery of the U.S. Judicial system and the U.S. itself. Does anyone in the U.S. know the meaning of the word "ILLEGAL". These people have no business being here, have no rights, especially to sue anyone and should simply be sent packing stright to whence they came.

 

[daniel1113]

I didn't realize that illegal aliens had ANY rights, much less the right to use our judicial system. I say we send them back to Mexico...

 

[Aegion]

Originally posted by: daniel1113
I didn't realize that illegal aliens had ANY rights, much less the right to use our judicial system. I say we send them back to Mexico...

That statement on the rights of illegals should not always be true. I.E. there are cases where underage minors have been persuaded to come over the border and then been held in conditions where they basicly slaves working for literally no pay whatsoever and compelled to work under threat of physical violence against them if they didn't comply. Obviously these individuals should have the ability to sue the people who did this to them, although they should not automaticly get citizenship. Remember that foreign nationals are allowed to sue in US courts, legal liability is not just an issue if the plaintiff is from the US. I suspect Wal-Mart is definately not a saint in this matter, although the people who might be justified in suing are the janitors who are US Citizens and recently denied empolyment at Wal-Mart, who hired illegals instead of them.

 

[FatJackSprat]

Americans Demand Increased Governmental Protection From Selves

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: Aegion

Originally posted by: daniel1113
I didn't realize that illegal aliens had ANY rights, much less the right to use our judicial system. I say we send them back to Mexico...

That statement on the rights of illegals should not always be true. I.E. there are cases where underage minors have been persuaded to come over the border and then been held in conditions where they basicly slaves working for literally no pay whatsoever and compelled to work under threat of physical violence against them if they didn't comply. Obviously these individuals should have the ability to sue the people who did this to them, although they should not automaticly get citizenship. Remember that foreign nationals are allowed to sue in US courts, legal liability is not just an issue if the plaintiff is from the US. I suspect Wal-Mart is definately not a saint in this matter, although the people who might be justified in suing are the janitors who are US Citizens and recently denied empolyment at Wal-Mart, who hired illegals instead of them.

Although these cases are far and few, illegal aliens should not be allowed to use our judicial system to file a lawsuit against a U.S. citizen. I would hope that those people that knowingly take advantage of illegal aliens by persuading them to cross the border would be prosecuted to the full extent under U.S. law, but that is not up to an illegal alien. PERIOD.

 

[privatebreyer]

Originally posted by: FatJackSprat
Americans Demand Increased Governmental Protection From Selves

The Onion does it again.

The point is that that coffee wouldn't had burned her at all had she not spilled it on herself. Neither would the pickle have burned any one had they not dropped them.

All you need is a little common sense. Yeah, McD's shouldn't have the coffee too hot. But it was by no means an intenional mistake, and surely not worth the oddles of money people get for stuff like this.. Its this kinda stuff that makes insurance more expensive for everyone.

 

[Aegion]

Originally posted by: daniel1113
Although these cases are far and few, illegal aliens should not be allowed to use our judicial system to file a lawsuit against a U.S. citizen. I would hope that those people that knowingly take advantage of illegal aliens by persuading them to cross the border would be prosecuted to the full extent under U.S. law, but that is not up to an illegal alien. PERIOD.

You're being a real idiot here. If a Mexican citizen transacts business with someone from the US and gets cheated, they currently can sue a US citizen as long as they can demonstrate US courts should have juritiction, i.e. if a Mexican citizen buys something from a online stores in the US, he can sue in US courts. What you are simply wrong about is that an illegal alien in the US magically loses any right to sue in US courts which he would actually have under every other circumstance. What you are suggesting means that if someone was kidnapped and involuntarily brought into the US, he would suddenly lose any ability to sue the perpetrator since he happened to be an illegal alien. This does not mean that illegal aliens should not be deported or have all the rights of US citizens, but they do maintain certain rights such as the ability to report a crime commited against them to the police (they may get handed over to the INS and deported, but that's doesn't mean that the police won't investigate the report.) Its quite clear that illegal aliens have always potentially had the ability to sue in US courts, its just that they may get in trouble for their illegal status once they bring their existance in the US to the attention of the US government.

 

[Aegion]

Originally posted by: privatebreyer
But it was by no means an intenional mistake,

You clearly didn't pay much attention to the details of the case, McDonalds consistantly and persistantly kept their coffee at a temperature beyond what the local safe limits were in order to sell coffee with cheaper beans. They made a decision to keep the coffee hot since they calculated that the liability costs would be lower than dropping the temperature and selling more expensive beans. There is abundant evidence that McDonalds intentionally kept their coffee at a dangerously hot temperature which they knew made it more likely that a customer would get seriously burned. The debate is whether giving the plaintif this amount of money was the appriopriate way to address this conduct.

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: Aegion

Originally posted by: daniel1113
Although these cases are far and few, illegal aliens should not be allowed to use our judicial system to file a lawsuit against a U.S. citizen. I would hope that those people that knowingly take advantage of illegal aliens by persuading them to cross the border would be prosecuted to the full extent under U.S. law, but that is not up to an illegal alien. PERIOD.

You're being a real idiot here. If a Mexican citizen transacts business with someone from the US and gets cheated, they currently can sue a US citizen as long as they can demonstrate US courts should have juritiction, i.e. if a Mexican citizen buys something from a online stores in the US, he can sue in US courts. What you are simply wrong about is that an illegal alien in the US magically loses any right to sue in US courts which he would actually have under every other circumstance. What you are suggesting means that if someone was kidnapped and involuntarily brought into the US, he would suddenly lose any ability to sue the perpetrator since he happened to be an illegal alien. This does not mean that illegal aliens should not be deported or have all the rights of US citizens, but they do maintain certain rights such as the ability to report a crime commited against them to the police (they may get handed over to the INS and deported, but that's doesn't mean that the police won't investigate the report.) Its quite clear that illegal aliens have always potentially had the ability to sue in US courts, its just that they may get in trouble for their illegal status once they bring their existance in the US to the attention of the US government.

Actually, your the one being the idiot here. There is a difference between a Mexian citizen that does business with a U.S. company and a Mexican citizen that crosses into the U.S. illegally. I stated that illegal aliens in the U.S. shouldn't be allowed to use our judicial system... I didn't mention foreign customers...