Woman Sues Over 1960s 'Batman' Series

[dullard]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
She did not *ASK* for millions - the jury awarded it to her as punitive damages. There is a big difference. She asked for $20K, McD's refused, then she went to court, where all of McD's dirty laundry came out, pissing-off the judge and jury.

She settled out of court, so yes, she did ask for whatever the final amount was.

And yes, she did sue for punitive damages. Heck, she asked for her daughter's lost wages.

 

[deftron]

dudh?

I think your onomatopoeia needs work

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
She did not *ASK* for millions - the jury awarded it to her as punitive damages. There is a big difference. She asked for $20K, McD's refused, then she went to court, where all of McD's dirty laundry came out, pissing-off the judge and jury.

She settled out of court, so yes, she did ask for whatever the final amount was.

Lawsuits aside, McD's coffee really is pretty fscking hot. It's like they bring it to a boil right in your cup. WTH?

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Lawsuits aside, McD's coffee really is pretty fscking hot. It's like they bring it to a boil right in your cup. WTH?

LOL:

---
Further, McDonalds' quality assurance manager testified that the company
actively enforces a requirement that coffee be held in the pot at 185
degrees, plus or minus five degrees. He also testified that a burn
hazard exists with any food substance served at 140 degrees or above,
and that McDonalds coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured
into styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn
the mouth and throat. The quality assurance manager admitted that burns
would occur, but testified that McDonalds had no intention of reducing
the "holding temperature" of its coffee.


McDonalds asserted that customers buy coffee on their way to work or
home, intending to consume it there. However, the companys own research
showed that customers intend to consume the coffee immediately while
driving.

McDonalds also argued that consumers know coffee is hot and that its
customers want it that way. The company admitted its customers were
unaware that they could suffer thirddegree burns from the coffee and
that a statement on the side of the cup was not a "warning" but a
"reminder" since the location of the writing would not warn customers of
the hazard.

---

 

[MaxDepth]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: MaxDepth
Yes, before a company releases product into another format, in this case releasing boxed editions in DVD, the company is liable for discovery, including clearing previous contracts from litigation. They have copies of this agreement and it is not like a compnay to "lose" such things. They thought since the principal was deceased none of the heirs would ever know of this agreement. Fox knew better and they sat on the information.

hell, NASA lost the moon landing tapes. you'd think that would be pretty fvcking important, no?

They went to the moon?


Actually my friend Skip Elsheimer is trying to help NASA out. He is the AV Geek of AVGeeks.com (http://avgeeks.com/).

The AV Geeks maintain an archive of over 18,000 16mm educational and industrial films. They show the films across the U.S. and make films available on DVD and online at YouTube, Google Video and the Internet Archive.

Every month he runs a show here in Durham and Raleigh based on a theme with 6 or seven educational films. Last month was "School-a-delic!" School films that are laced with hallucinogens. He sometimes goes down to Austin and runs shows down there.

 

[mattpegher]

Remember her father produced the series, which means he invested money in its production, that investment is entitled by contractual agreement so she is part owner of the series and the fact that one company sold rights to it to another company without her or her father's knowledge is fraud.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Statute of Limitations?

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: pontifex
"I wish it could have been avoided," Potter said from her home in Santa Fe. "Nobody likes litigation."


then don't be a greedy fvcking bitch and just let it go?

Oh... so you would just walk away from $4M that is owed to you?

Not EVERY lawsuit is a dumb one, you know...

[edit]

Others beat me to it.

Enough with the "OMGZ antoher lawusit!!!!!" She's owed money that is clearly outlined in a contract.

technically its not owed to her. it was her father

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
Statute of Limitations?

Some related info.

The exception protects plaintiffs in situations where they may not be aware for months or even years that they have been harmed. In such situations, statutes of limitations may start the clock ticking either on the "date of discovery" of the harm or on the date on which the plaintiff "should have discovered" the harm.

Things do vary from state to state though. That link includes a link to the 50 states length of the limits for contracts.

 

[slackerinabox]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
Because, when juries award obscene amounts, it's the consumer who ultimately pays. I'm the consumer.

come on, Micky D's and other companies can't raise end-user prices due to lawsuits - they wouldn't be able to compete on a price basis then. Did the price of coffee go up after the coffee case? These companies have huge revenue polls set aside for these sorta occassions, and insurance too... Just let the assswipes sue away and don't get worked up about it.. It's not worth the energy.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: pontifex
"I wish it could have been avoided," Potter said from her home in Santa Fe. "Nobody likes litigation."


then don't be a greedy fvcking bitch and just let it go?

Oh... so you would just walk away from $4M that is owed to you?

Not EVERY lawsuit is a dumb one, you know...

[edit]

Others beat me to it.

Enough with the "OMGZ antoher lawusit!!!!!" She's owed money that is clearly outlined in a contract.

technically its not owed to her. it was her father

Do you know what an estate is?

No.

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: pontifex
"I wish it could have been avoided," Potter said from her home in Santa Fe. "Nobody likes litigation."


then don't be a greedy fvcking bitch and just let it go?

Oh... so you would just walk away from $4M that is owed to you?

Not EVERY lawsuit is a dumb one, you know...

[edit]

Others beat me to it.

Enough with the "OMGZ antoher lawusit!!!!!" She's owed money that is clearly outlined in a contract.

technically its not owed to her. it was her father

Do you know what an estate is?

No.

sigh...
yes i know what it is but thats not my point

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: pontifex
"I wish it could have been avoided," Potter said from her home in Santa Fe. "Nobody likes litigation."


then don't be a greedy fvcking bitch and just let it go?

Oh... so you would just walk away from $4M that is owed to you?

Not EVERY lawsuit is a dumb one, you know...

[edit]

Others beat me to it.

Enough with the "OMGZ antoher lawusit!!!!!" She's owed money that is clearly outlined in a contract.

technically its not owed to her. it was her father

Do you know what an estate is?

No.

sigh...
yes i know what it is but thats not my point

Then what is your point? As the law sees it, it's every bit hers as it was her father's when he was alive.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: pontifex
"I wish it could have been avoided," Potter said from her home in Santa Fe. "Nobody likes litigation."


then don't be a greedy fvcking bitch and just let it go?

Expecting $4.4 million that she is (allegedly) entitled to is not greedy.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: freedomsbeat212
This woman has a genuine case and her father (and the estate that she represents) should get what the court deems fair. This is not the same as someone suing Oreos because the cookies "made" them fat. This is a genuine case.

Besides, I noticed this about ATOT - why are you guys so bitter toward bogus lawsuits against big corporations? Sure, McDonalds wasn't responsible for some tool spilling coffee on herself but why do you guys get so worked up about things like? People will always do stupid things to make money - whether it's david blaine nearly drowning himself to get ad revenue or some idiot cutting off his finger and then blaming the knife maker... That's the way the world works - the legal industry needs these silly cases to keep the lawyers busy. People are getting paid (the lawyers for the idiots and the lawyers for the big corporations), money is never coming out of your pocket, and the world moves on. Relax people! Besides, tobacco regulations wouldn't be as strict as they are now if it wasn't for the lawsuits that attacked big tobacco. We'd still have ads on tv, vending machines near schools, etc. etc. etc.

Do you think the money just magically appears? It all comes from us in the long run.

 

[slackerinabox]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: freedomsbeat212
This woman has a genuine case and her father (and the estate that she represents) should get what the court deems fair. This is not the same as someone suing Oreos because the cookies "made" them fat. This is a genuine case.

Besides, I noticed this about ATOT - why are you guys so bitter toward bogus lawsuits against big corporations? Sure, McDonalds wasn't responsible for some tool spilling coffee on herself but why do you guys get so worked up about things like? People will always do stupid things to make money - whether it's david blaine nearly drowning himself to get ad revenue or some idiot cutting off his finger and then blaming the knife maker... That's the way the world works - the legal industry needs these silly cases to keep the lawyers busy. People are getting paid (the lawyers for the idiots and the lawyers for the big corporations), money is never coming out of your pocket, and the world moves on. Relax people! Besides, tobacco regulations wouldn't be as strict as they are now if it wasn't for the lawsuits that attacked big tobacco. We'd still have ads on tv, vending machines near schools, etc. etc. etc.

Do you think the money just magically appears? It all comes from us in the long run.

Of course it does - but I'm the cynic who believes that they'll just find other ways to exploit our dollars instead of returning them to us.