The Drunk of the Irish

In Orlando, a lawsuit was filed against a rental car company by the estate of a woman who was killed in a car crash by a drunk driver. The woman was riding in a rental car driven by her boyfriend, an Irish tourist, who was legally drunk. He was eventually charged with manslaughter and driving under the influence.

The suit alleges that the rental car company should be liable for the woman’s death because the company “either knew or should have known about the unique cultural and ethnic customs in Ireland which involve the regular consumption of alcohol at pubs as a major component to Irish social life.”

Toilet of Terror

Canadian tourist Edward Skwarek has sued the Starbucks coffee chain for $1.5 million alleging that a highly personal part of his anatomy was crushed when it got caught between the toilet seat and bowl at a Manhattan Starbucks outlet. Skwarek was reportedly in a seated position on the commode. When he turned to retrieve the toilet paper, the seat shifted. As he leaned forward again the toilet seat clamped his penis. The 37 year-old Skwarek is asking for $1 million for what he describes as dire and permanent injuries to the affected organ. His wife Sherrie is also demanding $500,000 as compensation for depravation of his husbandly services.

The Drunk of the Irish

In Orlando, a lawsuit was filed against a rental car company by the estate of a woman who was killed in a car crash by a drunk driver. The woman was riding in a rental car driven by her boyfriend, an Irish tourist, who was legally drunk. He was eventually charged with manslaughter and driving under the influence.

The suit alleges that the rental car company should be liable for the woman’s death because the company “either knew or should have known about the unique cultural and ethnic customs in Ireland which involve the regular consumption of alcohol at pubs as a major component to Irish social life.”

More US bashing from Tripe-aporn who claims to be American.

The suit is a bunch of politically correct cr*p, but fits right in with your beliefs. I guess that America can't do anything right in your eyes.

Not U.S. bashing, Porkie. Frivilous lawsuits in the U.S. is a well known fact and a huge problem. For all I know Europe may have similar problems. But it does make you wonder about the sensibilities of people in general that <deleted> like this can even be taken seriously by the courts.

But the stories are sadly humorous.

Work-A-Day Grind

A Florida phone sex operator won a workers’ compensation settlement claiming she was injured after regularly pleasing herself at work. According to Reuters and ABC News, (Nov. 19) the 40-year-old employee developed carpal tunnel syndrome – also known as repetitive motion injury—in both hands from giving herself an orgasm as many as seven times a day while speaking with callers.

Not U.S. bashing, Porkie. Frivilous lawsuits in the U.S. is a well known fact and a huge problem. For all I know Europe may have similar problems. But it does make you wonder about the sensibilities of people in general that <deleted> like this can even be taken seriously by the courts.

But the stories are sadly humorous.

Work-A-Day Grind

A Florida phone sex operator won a workers’ compensation settlement claiming she was injured after regularly pleasing herself at work. According to Reuters and ABC News, (Nov. 19) the 40-year-old employee developed carpal tunnel syndrome – also known as repetitive motion injury—in both hands from giving herself an orgasm as many as seven times a day while speaking with callers.

Now that's funny!

A Philadelphia restaurant was sued after Amber Carson of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, slipped and broke her coccyx on a beverage that had been spilled on the floor. She was awarded $113,500. (Not bad, considering she had thrown the drink at her boyfriend during an argument 30 seconds earlier.)

I'd love to hear the legal arguments in a case like this. Can't imagine!!

Come Again?

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has begun pursuing discrimination claims for back pay on behalf of illegal aliens who had no lawful right to take or hold the jobs in the first place.

A meatpacking company paid $8,500 for insisting that an applicant get Immigration and Naturalization Service documentation that his registration card was legitimate. (National Legal Center for Public Interest July 1999 Newsletter), about 4/5 of way down page.

Most recently, the EEOC extracted a $72,000 settlement from a Holiday Inn Express hotel on behalf of nine illegal immigrants from Mexico who were fired as housekeepers in alleged retaliation for leading a successful union organizing drive. (Legal News)

Texas Congressman Lamar Smith called the new policy “absurd:” “These rules would, for example, require employers to hire back individuals who had been fired when it is illegal to have hired them in the first place.”

The deep pockets did it

Sixteen year-old middle school student Nathaniel Brazill was sentenced to 28 years in prison for shooting to death his favorite teacher. In the subsequent civil trial, the Florida jury amazingly found Brazill innocent of any liability. Instead, the jury placed the blame on the school board, the gun’s owner and the gun distributor. The jury said the school board was guilty for allowing Brazill on campus with a gun in his pocket, the gun distributor was guilty for not placing a safety lock on the gun preventing Brazill from pulling the trigger, and the gun owner was guilty of leaving the gun unlocked and loaded, allowing the boy to steal it. Apparently the jury figured pulling the trigger did not lead to the teacher’s death.

True, but sad.

Priceless

I love America !!!

Priceless

I love America !!!

We know you do!

Obviously you are infatuated with America's wonderful capitalist system and all the trappings!

To parafrase George Carlin: "If he is legaly drunk, what is the big fuss about?"

And the ridicoulus law-suite-amounts is just a testament that jurys are a _bad_ idea.

I'm truly curious. Are frivolous lawsuits a problem in GB, Australia, New Zealand, or elsewhere in Europe?

I'm truly curious. Are frivolous lawsuits a problem in GB, Australia, New Zealand, or elsewhere in Europe?

no, we don't have the liberty like you have in civil courts. Prosecutors will throw away about anything or put you on a long waiting list for you to lose patience over your case.

A Jarring Experience.

A West Virginia convenience store worker was awarded a whopping $2,699,000 in punitive damages after she injured her back opening a pickle jar, this according to a report in the Charleston Daily Mail.

The 'injured' worker also received $130,066 in compensation and $170,000 for emotional distress.

A State Supreme Court Justice, Spike Maynard, called this award an "outrageous sum." In his dissenting opinion, he wrote, "I know an excessive punitive damages award when I see one, and I see one here."

The court, however, upheld most of the punitive damages. Net result: $2.2 million.

A Little Too Much Booty.

Meredith Berkman, seeking $50 million, filed one of the first anti-fat lawsuits against the manufacturer of a snack food named Pirate's Booty. It looks like eating too much Pirate's Booty had added too much booty to Ms. Berkman's booty.

In December, 2001, the Good Housekeeping Institute tested Pirate's Booty, which is basically flavored puffed rice, and found that it contained 147 calories and 8.5 grams of fat, while its label said it contained only 120 calories and 2.5 grams of fat.

The manufacturer, Robert's American Gourmet Foods (a subsidiary of Keystone Foods), blamed the problem on a change in its manufacturing process and immediately recalled the product from store shelves.

Nearly four months after the recall, Berkman filed a $50 million class-action lawsuit against Robert's Foods, claiming "emotional distress" and "weight gain...mental anguish, outrage and indignation." The complaint claims to represent all consumers who ruined their diets and had to spend more time at the gym because they ate mislabeled Pirate's Booty.

Wacky Warning Labels - Things that must be made perfectly clear to prevent lawsuits.

On a blanket from Taiwan:

Not to be used as protection from a tornado.

Warning on fireplace log:

Caution -- Risk of Fire.

A warning on a pair of shin guards manufactured for bicyclists:

Shin pads cannot protect any part of the body they do not cover.

Warning on an electric router made for carpenters:

This product not intended for use as a dental drill.

On a bottle of shampoo for dogs:

Caution: The contents of this bottle should not be fed to fish.

On a hair dryer:

Do not use in shower.

On Marks & Spencer bread pudding

Product will be hot after heating.

On a string of Chinese made Christmas lights:

For indoor or outdoor use only.

On Sainsbury's peanuts:

Warning: Contains nuts.

On an American Airlines packet of nuts:

Instructions - open packet, eat nuts.

On some frozen dinners:

Serving suggestion: defrost.

On a hotel provided shower cap:

Fits one head.

On Nytol Nighttime Sleep-Aid:

Warning: May cause drowsiness.

Warning on a cartridge for a laser printer:

Do not eat toner.

A wheel 13" a wheelbarrow warns:

Not for highway use.

Can of self-defense pepper spray warns:

May irritate eyes.

Warning on a Conair Pro Style 1600 hair dryer:

Do not use in shower. Never use while sleeping.

Silly Putty package warning:

Not for use as earplugs.

On a bag of Fritos:

You could be a winner! No purchase necessary. Details inside.

Baby stroller warning:

Remove child before folding.

Household iron warns:

Never iron clothes while they are being worn.

A fireplace lighter cautions:

Do not use near fire, flame or sparks.

A handheld massager warns consumers:

Don't use while sleeping or unconscious.

Warning on underarm deodorant:

Do not spray in eyes.

Cardboard car sun shield that keeps sun off the dashboards warns

Do not drive with sun shield in place

Warning on a sharpening stone:

Knives are sharp.

Bottle water label warns:

Twist top off with hands. Throw top away. Do not put top in mouth.

On a box or rat poison

Warning: Has been found to cause cancer in laboratory mice.

On a Domino's Pizza box

Caution: Contents hot!

Toilet bowl cleaning brush warns:

Do not use orally.

An electric cattle prods warns:

For use on animals only

A can of air freshner warns:

Keep out of reach of children and teenagers

Cheap rubber ball toy warning:

Choking hazard: This toy is a small ball.

Caution on a package of dice:

Not for human consumption.

In the manual of a chainsaw:

Do not attempt to stop the blade with your hand.

Stamped on the barrel of a .22 calibre rifle:

Warning: Misuse may cause injury or death.

Instructions for an electric thermometer:

Do not use orally after using rectally.

On the wrapper of a Fruit Roll-Up snack:

Remove plastic before eating.

A TV remote controller warns:

Not dishwasher safe.

The most frivolous suit I heard of was that women who sued McDonalds after burning herself with a cup of hot coffee.

She'd bought the coffee, and put the cup between her legs as she proceeded to drive away. This resulted in hot coffee spilling onto her thighs and burning her.

Amazingly, the jury agreed with her argument that McDonalds served their coffee TOO HOT ! (wow, hot coffee is bad for your thighs. Who would have figured that ? )

Her initial award was over-turned on appeal, but she still came out of it with a couple of million dollars I believe.

Not a bad payday for doing something totally stupid and showing the world what a moron you are.

The most frivolous suit I heard of was that women who sued McDonalds after burning herself with a cup of hot coffee.

She'd bought the coffee, and put the cup between her legs as she proceeded to drive away. This resulted in hot coffee spilling onto her thighs and burning her.

Amazingly, the jury agreed with her argument that McDonalds served their coffee TOO HOT ! (wow, hot coffee is bad for your thighs. Who would have figured that ? )

Her initial award was over-turned on appeal, but she still came out of it with a couple of million dollars I believe.

Not a bad payday for doing something totally stupid and showing the world what a moron you are.

I agree. Imagine the level of stupidity required to firsty put the coffee between you legs - but then, rather than hang your head in shame, you sue! It's a mad mad world!

Warning, contents are hot. It does seem strange that this is printed on the side of a hot drink!!!

I agree. Imagine the level of stupidity required to firsty put the coffee between you legs - but then, rather than hang your head in shame, you sue! It's a mad mad world!

Warning, contents are hot. It does seem strange that this is printed on the side of a hot drink!!!

No kidding. As a result of that ruling, most of the fast food chains had to adjust the temperature of their coffee makers (and hot water heaters for tea & hot chocolate of course), plus put warning signs on their cups.

(Warning: Hot Coffee may be Hot)

Too bad you couldn't legislate stupidity out of people.

The examples in this thread are just the tip of the iceberg as well, the ones that were odd enough to make the headlines.

Imagine how many more frivolous suits have gone on that we never hear about, or get tossed out of court by a judge with brain ?

The case with the hot coffie is acctually valid in it's claim, that the coffie was too hot. It held 80 degrees and has repetedly been sold to hot (at this degree) for many years. Has to do with saving money on McD part - but that temperature is not normal serving temperature for coffie and frankly - will scold you badly.

However, the totalsum she was awarded was rather high, but that is another issue, as I covered it in my previous post.

(After overturn it appears she only was awarded 1.3million. Only you ask? Yes, since it merely covered all her medical expense, practically. Apparently plastic surgery on her legs was needed to rebuild the skin and so on.)

The case with the hot coffie is acctually valid in it's claim, that the coffie was too hot. It held 80 degrees and has repetedly been sold to hot (at this degree) for many years. Has to do with saving money on McD part - but that temperature is not normal serving temperature for coffie and frankly - will scold you badly.

However, the totalsum she was awarded was rather high, but that is another issue, as I covered it in my previous post.

(After overturn it appears she only was awarded 1.3million. Only you ask? Yes, since it merely covered all her medical expense, practically. Apparently plastic surgery on her legs was needed to rebuild the skin and so on.)

Serving boiling water is certainly dangerous, we should have shutdown McD on that pretense and that would have done the world a favor.

I'm truly curious. Are frivolous lawsuits a problem in GB, Australia, New Zealand, or elsewhere in Europe?

no, we don't have the liberty like you

You don't say.

It held 80 degrees... ...but that temperature is not normal serving temperature for coffie and frankly - will scold you badly.

This is why so many places in the USA serve 'cold' hot drinks! I never drink tea in the states because they hand you a cold cup of water with a tea bag on top!

Tea should be brewed at 100 degrees, coffee at (approx) 96 degrees. Any less and your beverage is cold!!!

So what if these temperature scald! We should be intelligent enough not to place it between our legs and drive...

Give me 'hot' hot drinks please!

The infamous coffee woman sustained third degree burns and just like TAWP says, had to resort to plastic surgery to rebuild skin and fix up the genitals. Part of the story is also that 700 people had been injured by their "too hot" coffee before she won the lawsuit.

Even still, how many sensible people would place a hot drink in their crotch while driving? Som nam na, as far as I'm concerned. Yeah, maybe the coffee was too hot, but she was first and foremost stupid.

Which is the point of most of these frivolous lawsuits. The people are stupid and create their own problems, then blame someone else. Of course, I'm sure the legal beagles add to the fervor immensely.

Little do people realize the true expense and consequences of this trend. The worst part, IMHO, is that it sends the wrong message - you do not have to take responsibility for your actions since others can be made to blame. That false concept runs deeper than most would imagine and plays itself out in more than a few ways.

The expense is not hard to imagine - to companies large and small and also individuals. Medical insurance is astronomical due to the prolific malpractice lawsuits. This in turn is pricing medical treatment out of the range of the common man.

Warning labels and product liability which must cover against every imaginable human stupidity.

And then there are seemingly harmless activities which suffer. Playgrounds for children, for instance. Since a kid could potentially get hurt the owner of the playground must be covered for liability insurance. And when the awarded damages are so totally out of line with the actual damage suffered insurance premiums become enough of a deterent to close playgrounds down. That's just one innocuous example.

Stupid is as stupid does.

I'm truly curious. Are frivolous lawsuits a problem in GB, Australia, New Zealand, or elsewhere in Europe?

no, we don't have the liberty like you have in civil courts. Prosecutors will throw away about anything or put you on a long waiting list for you to lose patience over your case.

Speaking as a lawyer in the UK, I would say that although we don't have quite the same problems as in the US, we could have if the rules were the same as in the States.

There is no such thing as punitive damages in general cases, so claimants - and especially lawyers - don't get the massive awards one hears about in the US. It is almost unheard of to get a jury when suing (exceptions would include public interest or libel cases). Therefore, a judge will assess the claim based on strict evidence, not on the tactics of the lawyer of the dislike of a company by the jury. If the matter is unlikely to succeed, the judge will strike it out as being a waste of time. If a jury awards a large amount, there is an appeal and the award is reduced in line with guidelines (I was involved with a case where a jury's award of £250,000 was reduced on appeal to £4,000).

You sue for compensation and have to evidence your loss, for example, if you are no longer fit to work the damages will be for loss of earnings until retirement age, and so on. Everything is subject to proof, so you would have to strictly prove that you were unable to work, then prove your income, then actuaries work out your likely promotion prospects, blah blah blah - you get the idea.

I'm truly curious. Are frivolous lawsuits a problem in GB, Australia, New Zealand, or elsewhere in Europe?

It is on the increase though. Tobacco lawsuits have started through the Eeuro.commision. and Things are gtting sillier...

Smoking isn public is becoming harder too, apparently.

I choose third world.

The most frivolous suit I heard of was that women who sued McDonalds after burning herself with a cup of hot coffee.

She'd bought the coffee, and put the cup between her legs as she proceeded to drive away. This resulted in hot coffee spilling onto her thighs and burning her.

Amazingly, the jury agreed with her argument that McDonalds served their coffee TOO HOT ! (wow, hot coffee is bad for your thighs. Who would have figured that ? )

Her initial award was over-turned on appeal, but she still came out of it with a couple of million dollars I believe.

Not a bad payday for doing something totally stupid and showing the world what a moron you are.

Every drive through has a speed bump at the entrance and one at the exit.

She burnt herself driving over one of these sleeping policemen and got away with just under three million dollars.

Legacy she leaves for the rest of us, is that is almost impossible to get a HOT drink in any of these places now. Which would have been okay if they had not stopped serving beer. But they did. Stop the beer.

Cow.

It held 80 degrees... ...but that temperature is not normal serving temperature for coffie and frankly - will scold you badly.

Yeah... I hate it when my drinks tell me off...

This is why so many places in the USA serve 'cold' hot drinks! I never drink tea in the states because they hand you a cold cup of water with a tea bag on top!

Tea should be brewed at 100 degrees, coffee at (approx) 96 degrees. Any less and your beverage is cold!!!

So what if these temperature scald! We should be intelligent enough not to place it between our legs and drive...

Give me 'hot' hot drinks please!

Right on right on!

It held 80 degrees... ...but that temperature is not normal serving temperature for coffie and frankly - will scold you badly.

This is why so many places in the USA serve 'cold' hot drinks! I never drink tea in the states because they hand you a cold cup of water with a tea bag on top!

Tea should be brewed at 100 degrees, coffee at (approx) 96 degrees. Any less and your beverage is cold!!!

So what if these temperature scald! We should be intelligent enough not to place it between our legs and drive...

Give me 'hot' hot drinks please!

Oh come now. Surly you can't say you dislike iced coffee and tea? You have never had iced Thai tea than, very sweet!

yea, but iced drinks are not HOT drinks...

Suegha states she wants her Hot drinks HOT!

My favourite warning label;

On a Japanese food processor: "Not to be used for the other use".

Any guesses on what those Japanese are doing to abuse their food processors? This is after all, the country where you can buy used panties out of vending machines.

cv