Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Current Events' started by BoyBach, May 3, 2007.
If you'll excuse the jingoism: Only in the USA!
LOL this guy is ridiculous!
Maybe it's worth staying in the U.S.A to make a quick buck? Suckers!
that's unbelievable! The day he went home and thought all that through, he must have been going crazy around the house.. The $500,000 he charged for "emotional" break down or w/e is probably from him tossing **** around his house and breaking ****
At the risk of being labeled a Chauvinist, I won't excuse the jingoism. An example to the rule is just that, an example. If a country has a legal system predicated on the notion that every person is entitled to his/her day in court, then there will be people who take advantage of the system. The fault, in this case, rests with the person filing the lawsuit and does not serve as an indictment of the American legal system.
Finally, "Only in ..." has to be the most open-ended, over-used statement of all time. You can pretty much fill in the blank, as with most doctor/lawyer jokes.
A case of 'lost in translation', me thinks.
I'd have sued for shoe leather costs too - I mean all that wear and tear back and forth to get his trousers. Really, not ensuring he's properly compensated for all losses
They say a lawyer who represents him/herself has a fool for a client. Here is living proof.
This is a funny story, but it is indicative of nothing except how weird people can be sometimes.
I must say, though, in response to the OP: I'm not clear how a clear expression of contempt for the American legal system is a statement that's "lost in translation." (Statements such as "Only in the U.S.A." betray cynicism; they do not create an open dialogue.)
For the record, abuses like this one annoy me, but I can guarantee you that they happen in every country in the world with a democratically elected government and a legitimate judicial system. The penalties for filing "frivolous" lawsuits vary and there are varying points of entry for people into said legal system, but I'd rather the point of entry be too low than too high. It's far easier to correct excesses than right abuses.
Well, unfortunately often enough people succeed with frivolous lawsuits. Just think of the woman that burned her legs with hot coffee because of her own stupidity and got millions from McDonalds...
read about this earlier. just insane. i hope the guy loses and has to pay these poor people back for their loss of time/money/and emotional distress caused by stupidity.
I wouldn't call myself the most patriotic of folks, but it sometimes confuses me why I get so uptight when people repeatedly bash the US. Sure, it's not perfect and it's got it's fair share of foolishness.. but it's a HUGE country with 300 million people!! Statistically, there's bound to be shenanigans! Again, not sure why I should care..
The sad thing about that case is how little people know about the particulars. As I recall, there were a few issues there.
1. The lid on the coffee cup was not properly attached--nor could it be because of a design flaw
2. The coffee was more than 200 degrees--far hotter than coffee is meant to be served and hot enough to cause bodily injury
Now, here are two examples of frivolous lawsuits:
1. Apple records suing Apple Computer (Where: England)
2. The overweight man who sued McDonald's for his excessive weight (Where: US o' A)
great, and this guy is a judge?!
Jeez, I think I'll keep my trap shut in future!
I think the reason is simple. Rather than sharing the story so we could all have a laugh at the nonsense of the case, the OP uses it as a foundation on which to indict an entire nation. "Only in the USA" certainly ranks low on the insult scale, but the OP uses it to lump all Americans in the same boat as person filing the lawsuit.
I think it should also be noted that just because someone sues for $X, doesn't mean they get that amount. The judge may rule in favor of the man, but only give him $500 for the cost of the trousers. I don't think anyone in the world REALLY thinks he could get $65mil out of a dry cleaner.
That works for me.
I'm sorry that my comments have caused you offence.
I think this should immediately open the door to have his sanity evaluated.
$0.5 million pain and suffering for not having a particular pair of pants for a day of work? I might reward myself with a cup of coffee on a day that bad, not half a million dollars.
He rejected a settlement offer of $12,000. If a court awards him less, he could be faced with paying their legal bill (at least that's how it works over here - if you refuse a settlement and get awarded less, you have wasted court time and have to pay your opponents costs).
You've clearly never worn assless chaps.
Yes, people from other countries have sued for weird reasons as well, but the US is home of the frivolous lawsuit. It's as American as apple pie. People just like to laugh at these cases, and your country supplies many of the "haha"s, that's all.
Even if the coffee hadn't had a lid at all, coffee is hot, you don't put it between your legs while driving. And besides, who decides at what temperature coffee is served? You should KNOW coffee is hot and can burn you.
Well not to work. The article stated he took his pants in 1 pair at a time so presumably he had at least one pair of assed pants at home to wear to work. That's the cost of the pants + dry cleaning bills for a week/month for compensation, not $0.5 million.
Maybe we're all looking at this wrong and should instead be decrying the existance of the lawyers eager to profit (win or loose) from this foolishness?