It\'s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame...
Moron.
http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/democrat/news/local/8325410.htm
Moron.
http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/democrat/news/local/8325410.htm
It's not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame...
- Thread starter MikeD
- Start date
Re: It\'s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame...
Alcohol affects you greater at night? Wow, whoodathunkit.
People like to sue airlines because they mistakenly presume because they're flying multi-million dollar (well, leased) aircraft around, that they have deep pockets. Not so!
Alcohol affects you greater at night? Wow, whoodathunkit.
People like to sue airlines because they mistakenly presume because they're flying multi-million dollar (well, leased) aircraft around, that they have deep pockets. Not so!
tonyw
Well-Known Member
Re: It\'s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame...
Sheesh. What will they think of next?
Also, it's just me thinking here -- something that dude obviously can't do -- but if you're going to sue an airline, shouldn't you sue one that has some money on hand? After all, US Airways is talking about selling off their assets to stay alive, and you want to sue them?
Deep pockets? Yeah, if you don't mind getting some lint.
Sheesh. What will they think of next?
Also, it's just me thinking here -- something that dude obviously can't do -- but if you're going to sue an airline, shouldn't you sue one that has some money on hand? After all, US Airways is talking about selling off their assets to stay alive, and you want to sue them?
Deep pockets? Yeah, if you don't mind getting some lint.
chrisesp
New Member
Re: It\'s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame...
I have heard of some stupid lawsuits, but this ranks up there with the hot coffee at McDonalds! Isn't there like a two or three drink maximum on the plane anyways? And why $15,000, that's such a small amount!
I have heard of some stupid lawsuits, but this ranks up there with the hot coffee at McDonalds! Isn't there like a two or three drink maximum on the plane anyways? And why $15,000, that's such a small amount!
Re: It\'s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame...
[ QUOTE ]
but this ranks up there with the hot coffee at McDonalds!
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't want to defend Mcd's or the lawsuit but if you saw the facts in the case, you may look at it a little different. We reveiwed the case in a law class and eventhough Mcdonalds had complaints about the coffee they kept it hot, extremely hot. I believe it was around 180 degrees. During the case, the plaintiffs attorney came across training manuals or some official McD documents that instructed to keep the coffee Hot,Hot, Hot. They did not want individuals sitting around loitering and drinking the free refills. If it was to hot, I guess they figured the customers would leave because they did not want to wait.
I did not agree with the lawsuit, but I saw it a little differently after looking at some of the facts. Coffee is supposed to be hot, but not so hot that it causes burns to your skin.
facts
facts
one last one
[ QUOTE ]
but this ranks up there with the hot coffee at McDonalds!
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't want to defend Mcd's or the lawsuit but if you saw the facts in the case, you may look at it a little different. We reveiwed the case in a law class and eventhough Mcdonalds had complaints about the coffee they kept it hot, extremely hot. I believe it was around 180 degrees. During the case, the plaintiffs attorney came across training manuals or some official McD documents that instructed to keep the coffee Hot,Hot, Hot. They did not want individuals sitting around loitering and drinking the free refills. If it was to hot, I guess they figured the customers would leave because they did not want to wait.
I did not agree with the lawsuit, but I saw it a little differently after looking at some of the facts. Coffee is supposed to be hot, but not so hot that it causes burns to your skin.
facts
facts
one last one
mtsu_av8er
Well-Known Member
Re: It\'s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame...
[ QUOTE ]
Isn't there like a two or three drink maximum on the plane anyways?
[/ QUOTE ]
Not on any airline that I've flown on!!!
I think that they'll just stop serving you if you start getting drunk. I've been on international flights where they'd let you drink your fill.
[ QUOTE ]
Isn't there like a two or three drink maximum on the plane anyways?
[/ QUOTE ]
Not on any airline that I've flown on!!!
I think that they'll just stop serving you if you start getting drunk. I've been on international flights where they'd let you drink your fill.
Re: It\'s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame...
[ QUOTE ]
And why $15,000, that's such a small amount!
[/ QUOTE ]
My guess is $15,000 is way less than it would cost US Airways to go to court.
Who knows, the guy probably fell in front of an attorney.
It is ridiculous.
[ QUOTE ]
And why $15,000, that's such a small amount!
[/ QUOTE ]
My guess is $15,000 is way less than it would cost US Airways to go to court.
Who knows, the guy probably fell in front of an attorney.
It is ridiculous.
FL270
New Member
Re: It\'s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame...
This is one of the most patently ridiculous things I've ever heard in my life! The airline probably didn't tell him specifically that some people are more subject to claustrophobia on airplanes than in the middle of the friggin' desert ... does that mean he should sue them for a panic attack???
If he's alleging a malfunction with the escalator, US Airways probably isn't responsible for that ... I am fairly sure that maintaining the terminal facilities ultimately falls to the airport authority.
Someone asked about damages ... the way damages are stated in lawsuits varies with the law from state to state. Some require you to state a specific amount. Others don't. In this case, the plaintiff seeks "in excess of $15,000" ... an amount stated only to avoid having a judge move the case to a lower court.
Even if the airline was found liable for this guys injuries, something I think fairly unlikely, the amount of damages awarded would probably be limited to the cost of his medical care and maybe a little bit of P&S money. And if the guy REALLY wants to see pain and suffering, wait until he sees how small the check is after his shark lawyer takes 40% of it!
YES, for those who didn't know, 40% is the standard contingency for those TV lawyers who scream "NO FEE UNLESS YOU WIN!" ... if you win, they get almost half your money. Food for thought ...
This is one of the most patently ridiculous things I've ever heard in my life! The airline probably didn't tell him specifically that some people are more subject to claustrophobia on airplanes than in the middle of the friggin' desert ... does that mean he should sue them for a panic attack???
If he's alleging a malfunction with the escalator, US Airways probably isn't responsible for that ... I am fairly sure that maintaining the terminal facilities ultimately falls to the airport authority.
Someone asked about damages ... the way damages are stated in lawsuits varies with the law from state to state. Some require you to state a specific amount. Others don't. In this case, the plaintiff seeks "in excess of $15,000" ... an amount stated only to avoid having a judge move the case to a lower court.
Even if the airline was found liable for this guys injuries, something I think fairly unlikely, the amount of damages awarded would probably be limited to the cost of his medical care and maybe a little bit of P&S money. And if the guy REALLY wants to see pain and suffering, wait until he sees how small the check is after his shark lawyer takes 40% of it!
YES, for those who didn't know, 40% is the standard contingency for those TV lawyers who scream "NO FEE UNLESS YOU WIN!" ... if you win, they get almost half your money. Food for thought ...
tonyw
Well-Known Member
Re: It\'s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame...
Yeah, exactly. McDonald's got a lot of complaints about the coffee being too hot, and in the case of the woman who filed the lawsuit, she suffered severe burns and even had some of her clothing melt to her skin.
While she was an idiot for putting the coffee in her lap -- bad idea -- McDonald's definitely did contribute to the problem by making their coffee so hot.
Both sides were at fault, so it makes sense that McDonald's had to pay.
Back to the topic, these kind of lawsuits do nothing but clog the court and make people less willing to consider lawsuits with real merit. I hope the judge dismisses it.
Yeah, exactly. McDonald's got a lot of complaints about the coffee being too hot, and in the case of the woman who filed the lawsuit, she suffered severe burns and even had some of her clothing melt to her skin.
While she was an idiot for putting the coffee in her lap -- bad idea -- McDonald's definitely did contribute to the problem by making their coffee so hot.
Both sides were at fault, so it makes sense that McDonald's had to pay.
Back to the topic, these kind of lawsuits do nothing but clog the court and make people less willing to consider lawsuits with real merit. I hope the judge dismisses it.
Re: It\'s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame...
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, exactly. McDonald's got a lot of complaints about the coffee being too hot, and in the case of the woman who filed the lawsuit, she suffered severe burns and even had some of her clothing melt to her skin.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wow! Other people who think this way about that case...it's easy to laugh about it and call the woman an idiot, but I think most people overlook the fact that McD's sold her something to be consumed that caused incredible burning.
I hope this fool has to pay US Airways' court costs when he loses.
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, exactly. McDonald's got a lot of complaints about the coffee being too hot, and in the case of the woman who filed the lawsuit, she suffered severe burns and even had some of her clothing melt to her skin.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wow! Other people who think this way about that case...it's easy to laugh about it and call the woman an idiot, but I think most people overlook the fact that McD's sold her something to be consumed that caused incredible burning.
I hope this fool has to pay US Airways' court costs when he loses.
tonyw
Well-Known Member
Re: It\'s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame...
[ QUOTE ]
Wow! Other people who think this way about that case...it's easy to laugh about it and call the woman an idiot, but I think most people overlook the fact that McD's sold her something to be consumed that caused incredible burning.
I hope this fool has to pay US Airways' court costs when he loses.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, I was one of the people who used to think, sheesh, what an out of control legal system when we award someone damages for spilling coffee on her lap. I even joked about it with my brother when he graduated from law school and passed the bar -- I said something like now you can get rich by suing McDonald's when some old lady spills their coffee in her lap.
He chuckled, and said, check out the facts. Most people don't know them, and if people found out what really happened, they'd change their minds.
He was right.
There ARE a lot of frivilous lawsuits, and the one filed by the drunk joker against US Airways is one of them. I hope the judge dismisses the case very quickly.
[ QUOTE ]
Wow! Other people who think this way about that case...it's easy to laugh about it and call the woman an idiot, but I think most people overlook the fact that McD's sold her something to be consumed that caused incredible burning.
I hope this fool has to pay US Airways' court costs when he loses.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, I was one of the people who used to think, sheesh, what an out of control legal system when we award someone damages for spilling coffee on her lap. I even joked about it with my brother when he graduated from law school and passed the bar -- I said something like now you can get rich by suing McDonald's when some old lady spills their coffee in her lap.
He chuckled, and said, check out the facts. Most people don't know them, and if people found out what really happened, they'd change their minds.
He was right.
There ARE a lot of frivilous lawsuits, and the one filed by the drunk joker against US Airways is one of them. I hope the judge dismisses the case very quickly.
FL270
New Member
Re: It\'s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame...
[ QUOTE ]
Wow it use to be 33% - those bastiges!
[/ QUOTE ]The typical structure is usually 33% for non-litigated cases and 40% for litigated ones. Some really slimy plaintiff attorneys will go for 50% contingencies, but the 33/40 is pretty standard nowadays. You can keep 2/3s if they don't have to file a lawsuit, but the moment they walk in the courthouse door, up it goes ... even if a jury never sees the case.
Working in insurance for a couple of years taught me a LOT about the legal system ...
[ QUOTE ]
Wow it use to be 33% - those bastiges!
[/ QUOTE ]The typical structure is usually 33% for non-litigated cases and 40% for litigated ones. Some really slimy plaintiff attorneys will go for 50% contingencies, but the 33/40 is pretty standard nowadays. You can keep 2/3s if they don't have to file a lawsuit, but the moment they walk in the courthouse door, up it goes ... even if a jury never sees the case.
Working in insurance for a couple of years taught me a LOT about the legal system ...
Re: It\'s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame...
[ QUOTE ]
Any chance the airline can countersue him for being an old idiot??
[/ QUOTE ]
Careful there, sonny. Sixty-one ain't all that old. In fact it's looking closer everyday...
Or did you mean that he's been an idiot for a long time?
[ QUOTE ]
Any chance the airline can countersue him for being an old idiot??
[/ QUOTE ]
Careful there, sonny. Sixty-one ain't all that old. In fact it's looking closer everyday...
Or did you mean that he's been an idiot for a long time?
Minnesota_Flyer
New Member
Re: It\'s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame...
[ QUOTE ]
I have heard of some stupid lawsuits, but this ranks up there with the hot coffee at McDonalds!
[/ QUOTE ]
I have to agree with the others who have piped up: if you really look at the facts, McDonald's really deserved what they got. They intentionally kept their coffee MUCH hotter than the industry norm, and they had been repeatedly warned that people were burning themselves on the coffee (and I'm a business defense counsel).
[ QUOTE ]
And why $15,000, that's such a small amount!
[/ QUOTE ]
That's probably a quirk of state law, not that he doesn't want more than that. In Minnesota, if you want more than $50,000, you are required only to state that you are "seeking in excess of $50,000." Doesn't mean you don't really want $50,000,000.
My $4.20 (hey, that's lawyer time!!)
MF
[ QUOTE ]
I have heard of some stupid lawsuits, but this ranks up there with the hot coffee at McDonalds!
[/ QUOTE ]
I have to agree with the others who have piped up: if you really look at the facts, McDonald's really deserved what they got. They intentionally kept their coffee MUCH hotter than the industry norm, and they had been repeatedly warned that people were burning themselves on the coffee (and I'm a business defense counsel).
[ QUOTE ]
And why $15,000, that's such a small amount!
[/ QUOTE ]
That's probably a quirk of state law, not that he doesn't want more than that. In Minnesota, if you want more than $50,000, you are required only to state that you are "seeking in excess of $50,000." Doesn't mean you don't really want $50,000,000.
My $4.20 (hey, that's lawyer time!!)
MF
Minnesota_Flyer
New Member
Re: It\'s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame...
[ QUOTE ]
YES, for those who didn't know, 40% is the standard contingency for those TV lawyers who scream "NO FEE UNLESS YOU WIN!" ... if you win, they get almost half your money. Food for thought ...
[/ QUOTE ]
Well more than half in many cases, once all of the "costs" are factored in (or, actually, out).
MF
[ QUOTE ]
YES, for those who didn't know, 40% is the standard contingency for those TV lawyers who scream "NO FEE UNLESS YOU WIN!" ... if you win, they get almost half your money. Food for thought ...
[/ QUOTE ]
Well more than half in many cases, once all of the "costs" are factored in (or, actually, out).
MF
Re: It\'s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame...
[ QUOTE ]
Wow it use to be 33% - those bastiges!
[/ QUOTE ]
That is the case her in Minnesota, (at least in my case). I just heard from my attorney about a case over 1 1/2 years ago. A drunk driver ran a stop sign and and totaled my wifes truck when her and both kids were in it. Nobody suffered any damages. We received 10 large and the attorney gets 1/3. Looks like I am a definite for Network JC.
[ QUOTE ]
Wow it use to be 33% - those bastiges!
[/ QUOTE ]
That is the case her in Minnesota, (at least in my case). I just heard from my attorney about a case over 1 1/2 years ago. A drunk driver ran a stop sign and and totaled my wifes truck when her and both kids were in it. Nobody suffered any damages. We received 10 large and the attorney gets 1/3. Looks like I am a definite for Network JC.
Re: It\'s not whether you win or lose, but how you place the blame...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wow! Other people who think this way about that case...it's easy to laugh about it and call the woman an idiot, but I think most people overlook the fact that McD's sold her something to be consumed that caused incredible burning.
I hope this fool has to pay US Airways' court costs when he loses.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, I was one of the people who used to think, sheesh, what an out of control legal system when we award someone damages for spilling coffee on her lap. I even joked about it with my brother when he graduated from law school and passed the bar -- I said something like now you can get rich by suing McDonald's when some old lady spills their coffee in her lap.
He chuckled, and said, check out the facts. Most people don't know them, and if people found out what really happened, they'd change their minds.
He was right.
There ARE a lot of frivilous lawsuits, and the one filed by the drunk joker against US Airways is one of them. I hope the judge dismisses the case very quickly.
[/ QUOTE ]
Quick question on the McDs issue: The cups are labled as "caution: hto coffee", much in the same way the older deep-fried apple pies said "caution: filling hot" on the box. So I'd think McDs would be covered there.
Regards the fact that McDs was selling something hot to be consumed:
I would agree that if the actual coffee cup had materially failed (ie- coffee burned through it) and the resulting spill of coffee burned the lady, then McDs would be liable. If the lady simply mishandled the coffee cup and the coffee spilled of her own doing (and remember, the cup was labled as "contents hot"), then how is McDs liable?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wow! Other people who think this way about that case...it's easy to laugh about it and call the woman an idiot, but I think most people overlook the fact that McD's sold her something to be consumed that caused incredible burning.
I hope this fool has to pay US Airways' court costs when he loses.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, I was one of the people who used to think, sheesh, what an out of control legal system when we award someone damages for spilling coffee on her lap. I even joked about it with my brother when he graduated from law school and passed the bar -- I said something like now you can get rich by suing McDonald's when some old lady spills their coffee in her lap.
He chuckled, and said, check out the facts. Most people don't know them, and if people found out what really happened, they'd change their minds.
He was right.
There ARE a lot of frivilous lawsuits, and the one filed by the drunk joker against US Airways is one of them. I hope the judge dismisses the case very quickly.
[/ QUOTE ]
Quick question on the McDs issue: The cups are labled as "caution: hto coffee", much in the same way the older deep-fried apple pies said "caution: filling hot" on the box. So I'd think McDs would be covered there.
Regards the fact that McDs was selling something hot to be consumed:
I would agree that if the actual coffee cup had materially failed (ie- coffee burned through it) and the resulting spill of coffee burned the lady, then McDs would be liable. If the lady simply mishandled the coffee cup and the coffee spilled of her own doing (and remember, the cup was labled as "contents hot"), then how is McDs liable?