Is the American legal system a joke?

[President Gringo]

How can things like this happen? Only in America

The "Stella" awards rank up there with the Darwin awards. In
1994, a New Mexico jury awarded $ 2.9 million U.S. in damages
to 81-year-old Stella Liebeck who suffered third-degree burns to
her legs, groin and buttocks after spilling a cup of McDonald's
coffee on herself.

This case inspired an annual award - The "Stella" Award - for the
most frivolous lawsuit in the U.S. The ones listed below are clear
candidates. All these cases are verging on the outright ridiculous
and yet (in the good old USA) with the right attorney you could
win anything!


1. January 2000: Kathleen Robertson of Austin Texas was
awarded $780,000 by a jury of her peers after breaking her
ankle tripping over a toddler who was running inside a furniture
store. The owners of the store were understandably surprised at
the verdict, considering the misbehaving little bastard was Ms.
Robertson's son.

2. June 1998: A 19 year old Carl Truman of Los Angeles won
$74,000 and medical expenses when his neighbor ran over his
hand with a Honda Accord. Mr. Truman apparently didn't notice
there was someone at the wheel of the car, when he was trying
to steal his neighbor's hubcaps.

3. October 1998: A Terrence Dickson of Bristol, Pennsylvania
was leaving a house he had just finished robbing by way of the
garage. He was not able to get the garage door to go up since
the automatic door opener was malfunctioning. He couldn't
re-enter the house because the door connecting the house and
garage locked when he pulled it shut. The family was on vacation.
Mr. Dickson found himself locked in the garage for eight days.
He subsisted on a case of Pepsi he found, and a large bag of dry
dog food. He sued the homeowner's insurance claiming the
situation caused him undue mental anguish. The jury agreed to
the tune of half a million dollars.

4. October 1999: Jerry Williams of Little Rock, Arkansas was
awarded $14,500 and medical expenses after being bitten on the
buttocks by his next door neighbor's beagle. The beagle was on
a chain in it's owner's fenced-in yard. The award was less than
sought because the jury felt the dog might have been just a little
provoked at the time by Mr. Williams who was shooting it
repeatedly with a pellet gun.

5. May 2000: A Philadelphia restaurant was ordered to pay
Amber Carson of Lancaster, Pennsylvania $113,500 after she
slipped on a soft drink and broke her coccyx. The beverage
was on the floor because Ms. Carson threw it at her boyfriend
30 seconds earlier during an argument.

6. December 1997: Kara Walton of Claymont, Delaware
successfully sued the owner of a night club in a neighboring city
when she fell from the bathroom window to the floor and
knocked out her two front teeth. This occurred while Ms Walton
was trying to sneak! through the window in the ladies room to
avoid paying the $3.50 cover charge. She was awarded
$12,000 and dental expenses.


And the winner is:

Mr Merv Grazinski of Oklahoma City. In November 2000 Mr
Grazinski purchased a brand new 32 foot Winnebago motor
home. On his first trip home having joined the freeway, he set the
cruise control at 70 mph and calmly left the drivers seat to go into
the back and make himself a cup of coffee. Not surprisingly the
Winnie left the freeway, crashed and overturned. Mr Grazinski
sued Winnebago for not advising him in the handbook that he
couldn't actually do this. He was awarded $1,750,000 plus a
new Winnie.

(Winnebago actually changed their handbooks on the back of
this court case, just in case there are any other complete morons
buying their vehicles.)

 

[NameBox]

Very funny ... but also .... very very sad ....

I wonder what percentage of the awards the vultures (er, that would be lawyers), representing the agrieved thieves, vandals, jerks, etc., actually got ...

 

[ad-lib]

Are these people stupid? Yes. But nonetheless, All the best to them. Why complain about it? If an opportunity so luckily approached me. As the one's above. I would want some sort of compensation also. I would think America's legal system is great. If the avergage Joe Dick can pull of these types of law suits.
Shit, I guess it's true. This is the land opportunity.

So, thumbs up and congrats to all who were mentioned above. Stupid or not. Money is money.

 

Seeing your sig MCJ, are you serious that DOOM3.biz is worth that much? ROFL that was a good one

 

[President Gringo]

Originally posted by MC Juice
Are these people stupid? Yes. But nonetheless, All the best to them. Why complain about it? If an opportunity so luckily approached me. As the one's above. I would want some sort of compensation also. I would think America's legal system is great. If the avergage Joe Dick can pull of these types of law suits.
Shit, I guess it's true. This is the land opportunity.

So, thumbs up and congrats to all who were mentioned above. Stupid or not. Money is money.

So you think its ok for a business to close down because someone trips over thir OWN kid in their store? If you hurt yourself because of your own stupidity, why should someone else pay you?

You think this makes the American legal system great? It makes america look stupid.

 

[ad-lib]

So you think its ok for a business to close down because someone trips over thir OWN kid in their store?

Yup

If you hurt yourself because of your own stupidity, why should someone else pay you?

Tupac's "Changes" comes to mind. And I quote
"That's just the way it is"

You think this makes the American legal system great?

Did my post st sttt stutter, junior?

 

To me, this is basically theft aided by the legal system (juries can be very self projecting).

The world doesn't owe anyone anything.

 

[President Gringo]

*shakes his head at MCJuice*

Well, i guess i'll be breaking into your house, hurting myself when i brake your window and cut myself coz u don't have burgler friendly glass in your windows. I wonder how much i could sue you for for breaking into your house?

Safesys is talking sense, its nothing more than theft, might as well walk in with a gun and hold the place up.

 

[ad-lib]

Well, i guess i'll be breaking into your house, hurting myself when i brake your window and cut myself coz u don't have burgler friendly glass in your windows.

Stupid example. Because you can't. Someone breaks into my house. I have all the right in the world to kill that person. Someone robs your jewelry, makes there way out your door. You can drag them back in your house, and legitly kill them.
Its completely legal. So if you break your ass on my glass. I can stab you a few more times while your bleeding on the ground. Without worry of being arrested or sued.

Do research. And you will see.

 

[President Gringo]

well i was just about to click on "quote", and my finger slipped from the mouse. I lost my balance, and i fell and banged my head on the floor and lost some teeth........ITS ALL YOUR FAULT AND I'M GONNA SUE YOU!!!!

We can settle out of court if you like, $1million cash, or $2million cash and all your domains

 

[President Gringo]

Originally posted by MC Juice

Stupid example. Because you can't. Someone breaks into my house. I have all the right in the world to kill that person. Someone robs your jewelry, makes there way out your door. You can drag them back in your house, and legitly kill them.
Its completely legal. So if you break your ass on my glass. I can stab you a few more times while your bleeding on the ground. Without worry of being arrested or sued.

Do research. And you will see.

And not stupid, coz i could have broken in when you were out, cut myself and been arrested. I suggest you take out your windows to prevent liability

 

[ad-lib]

coz i could have broken in when you were out, cut myself and been arrested.

Huh? You were hurt inside of my home. Therefore nothing can happen to me. Wether im in or out of my house. What don't you get?

I mean move on. Your from England for f-cks sakes. You think your country is any better?

 

[President Gringo]

Originally posted by MC Juice

Huh? You were hurt inside of my home. Therefore nothing can happen to me. Wether im in or out of my house. What don't you get?

I mean move on. Your from England for f-cks sakes. You think your country is any better?

yes our legal system is superior to yours......if my first post doesn't justify that comment, i have one thing to say...OJ.

Little do you know your legal system is laughed at by people all around the world. Hell, we even have commercials that mock your system.


And the fact i would have hurt myself inside your home is why you should give me lots of cash, which of course you would do happily as you totally agree with the US Legal system. Let me just quote you #3 again:

3. October 1998: A Terrence Dickson of Bristol, Pennsylvania
was leaving a house he had just finished robbing by way of the
garage. He was not able to get the garage door to go up since
the automatic door opener was malfunctioning. He couldn't
re-enter the house because the door connecting the house and
garage locked when he pulled it shut. The family was on vacation.
Mr. Dickson found himself locked in the garage for eight days.
He subsisted on a case of Pepsi he found, and a large bag of dry
dog food. He sued the homeowner's insurance claiming the
situation caused him undue mental anguish. The jury agreed to
the tune of half a million dollars.

 

[President Gringo]

and funnily enough, your the only american that agrees with those pay outs, all the rest i have showed that to think its crazy.

 

[DNForum]

I decided to do some research on that first story, as some of these stories just seem totaly senseless, I couldn't beleive them at all. For the "Stella" case, look what page I dug out, it shows what happened, basicaly. Interesting read.. (introduction to the story: )

http://centerjd.org/free/mythbusters-free/MB_mcdonalds.htm

Anecdotal descriptions of a few atypical lawsuits intended to shock or amuse the public have been the cornerstone of the business community’s anti-jury advertising and public relations campaign since the 1980s. Focusing on a few rare, anecdotal cases, instead of the majority of cases that pass through the courts each year, feeds into a false and dangerous perception that the system is overflowing with frivolous lawsuits. Often such verdicts have either been thrown out or substantially reduced by trial judges or appellate courts, which is exactly how the system is supposed to work. Yet the public is given the false impression that a plaintiff received a windfall, a defendant was financially ruined, or the system failed. This is particularly irresponsible when, as is typical, cases are not cited by name or even by date so they can be checked for accuracy. When journalists or researchers do track them down, they find in virtually every situation that such cases have been misreported and misused.

And here is the rest..
_______________________

The “McDonald’s coffee” case. We have all heard it: a woman spills McDonald's coffee, sues and gets $3 million. Here are the facts of this widely misreported and misunderstood case:

Stella Liebeck, 79 years old, was sitting in the passenger seat of her grandson’s car having purchased a cup of McDonald’s coffee. After the car stopped, she tried to hold the cup securely between her knees while removing the lid. However, the cup tipped over, pouring scalding hot coffee onto her. She received third-degree burns over 16 percent of her body, necessitating hospitalization for eight days, whirlpool treatment for debridement of her wounds, skin grafting, scarring, and disability for more than two years. Morgan, The Recorder, September 30, 1994. Despite these extensive injuries, she offered to settle with McDonald’s for $20,000. However, McDonald’s refused to settle. The jury awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages -- reduced to $160,000 because the jury found her 20 percent at fault -- and $2.7 million in punitive damages for McDonald’s callous conduct. (To put this in perspective, McDonald's revenue from coffee sales alone is in excess of $1.3 million a day.) The trial judge reduced the punitive damages to $480,000. Subsequently, the parties entered a post-verdict settlement. According to Stella Liebeck’s attorney, S. Reed Morgan, the jury heard the following evidence in the case:

1. By corporate specifications, McDonald's sells its coffee at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit;

2. Coffee at that temperature, if spilled, causes third-degree burns (the skin is burned away down to the muscle/fatty-tissue layer) in two to seven seconds;

3. Third-degree burns do not heal without skin grafting, debridement and whirlpool treatments that cost tens of thousands of dollars and result in permanent disfigurement, extreme pain and disability of the victim for many months, and in some cases, years;

4. The chairman of the department of mechanical engineering and bio-mechanical engineering at the University of Texas testified that this risk of harm is unacceptable, as did a widely recognized expert on burns, the editor in chief of the leading scholarly publication in the specialty, the Journal of Burn Care and Rehabilitation;

5. McDonald's admitted that it has known about the risk of serious burns from its scalding hot coffee for more than 10 years -- the risk was brought to its attention through numerous other claims and suits, to no avail;

6. From 1982 to 1992, McDonald's coffee burned more than 700 people, many receiving severe burns to the genital area, perineum, inner thighs, and buttocks;

7. Not only men and women, but also children and infants, have been burned by McDonald's scalding hot coffee, in some instances due to inadvertent spillage by McDonald's employees;

8. At least one woman had coffee dropped in her lap through the service window, causing third-degree burns to her inner thighs and other sensitive areas, which resulted in disability for years;

9. Witnesses for McDonald's admitted in court that consumers are unaware of the extent of the risk of serious burns from spilled coffee served at McDonald's required temperature;

10. McDonald's admitted that it did not warn customers of the nature and extent of this risk and could offer no explanation as to why it did not;

11. McDonald's witnesses testified that it did not intend to turn down the heat -- As one witness put it: “No, there is no current plan to change the procedure that we're using in that regard right now;”

12. McDonald's admitted that its coffee is “not fit for consumption” when sold because it causes severe scalds if spilled or drunk;

13. Liebeck's treating physician testified that her injury was one of the worst scald burns he had ever seen.

Morgan, The Recorder, September 30, 1994. Moreover, the Shriner’s Burn Institute in Cincinnati had published warnings to the franchise food industry that its members were unnecessarily causing serious scald burns by serving beverages above 130 degrees Fahrenheit.

In refusing to grant a new trial in the case, Judge Robert Scott called McDonald's behavior “callous.” Moreover, “the day after the verdict, the news media documented that coffee at the McDonald's in Albuquerque [where Liebeck was burned] is now sold at 158 degrees. This will cause third-degree burns in about 60 seconds, rather than in two to seven seconds [so that], the margin of safety has been increased as a direct consequence of this verdict.” Id.

Irresponsible use of anecdotal cases by “tort reform” proponents is nothing new. The case of Charles Bigbee was the “McDonald’s coffee case” of the 1980s. Ronald Reagan described Bigbee’s case in a 1986 speech as follows: “In California, a man was using a public telephone booth to place a call. An alleged drunk driver careened down the street, lost control of his car, and crashed into a phone booth. Now, it’s no surprise that the injured man sued. But you might be startled to hear whom he sued: the telephone company and associated firms!” In fact, Bigbee’s leg was severed after a car hit the phone booth in which he had been trapped. The door jammed after he saw the car coming ‚ he tried to flee but could not. The accident left him unable to walk, severely depressed and unable to work. Because the phone company had placed the booth near a known hazardous intersection, and because the door was defective, keeping him trapped inside, he sued the phone company for compensation. Bigbee was brought to Congress to testify. He said, “I believe it would be very helpful if I could talk briefly about my case and show how it has been distorted not only by the President, but by the media as well. That is probably the best way to show that people who are injured due to the fault of others should be justly compensated for the damages they have to live with the rest of their lives.” House Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs, July 23, 1986. Charles Bigbee died in 1994 at age 52. Nader, Smith, No Contest: Corporate Lawyers and the Perversion of Justice in America (1996).

 

[Nic]

yes thats more like it

 

[President Gringo]

Thanks for that insight. I could see how some of those cases could be twisted, but not some...like that burgler.

 

[mike]

Very astute observations Dan, and right on target!

Now they are using the same antecdotal tactics citing certain high-profile cybersquatter cases to emasculate the rights of all domain owners.