|
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
Quote:
|
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
Speaking of ridiculous lawsuits, here's a good one out of Dublin.
A large company hired a man on as CEO, but after 3 years, realized all the responsibilities he had could, and in many cases, already were, being done by other people. So, him being redundant and all, he was sacked. But not in the 'clear out your office and get the hell out way.' He was informed that he was being made redundant (fired), however, then company would continue to pay him for a period of 12 months at his full salary of 250,000euro AND he would retain all the benefits (medical, dental, car, etc) for that 12 month period. And he's taking THEM to court. His reason? He figures he should be given TWO YEARS notice. Can you imagine? 'Well, Bob, we don't really need you anymore, but we're going to pay you 250K over the next year to do sweet eff-all.' 'That's not fair, George! I deserve to be paid half a million euro over the next two years to sit on my oversized posterior.' WTF? And he's only 44. That means at least another 21 working years where he could get a similar, or superior salary. Some people... |
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
Quote:
|
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
Quote:
Sounds like fairly negligent behaivior, at least on the surface. Geoschmo |
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
Quote:
|
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
Isn't "SEV" a registered character for a sci-fi channel show?
As for lawsuits, take casinos. One of the most frequently sued franchises on earth, people often stage elaborate accidents to sue and reclaim thier losses. What most people don't realize is 99% of a casino is video taped and the remaining 1% is watched manually. |
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
In tort law, there is a major distinction between negligence and recklessness.
Negligence gives rise to a cause of action when the person does not exercise the standard of prudent care that a normal reasonable man on the street would. Recklessness implies something more than negligences in that there is a deliberate disregard for the saftey of others. I don't know much about MacDonald's practices, but it is questionable whether they are reckless. Some people like and want their coffee scalding hot. They could be negligent, but it is a toss up. The courts could say that the consumer knows coffee is hot and should have taken proper care. The rebuttal of course is that the coffee is hotter than normal. Now if the prudent, reasonable man on the street would not make coffee so hot, then there is negligence for that is the standard. The prudent reasonable man on the street will not go through a red light. If he does, then he is responsible for the consequences. But some reasonsable men will make their coffee hot and there is the rub. Mexican food can be "hot" and a susceptable person can suffer health problems with the ingestion of hot chilli peppers etc. Yet, to expect them to prepare food which is bland and tasteless in order to avoid a lawsuit would not normally be reasonable in the sense that the reasonable man on the street would not prepare such hot food. On balance, my opinion is that MacDonald's will probably not be liable. But just as two lawyers can disagree, the judge can hold there is negligence. If McDonald's was wise, they would have put a sign up saying that their coffee is hotter than normal and the customer should take due care. Offering to dilute the beverage would help too. But then lawyers being lawyers, the arguement will devolve around whether the sign was prominently displayed, whether the customer saw it, whether the customer ought to have seen it, etc. |
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
Tbontob, I'm not a lawyer. I wasn't aware of the legal difference between negligence and recklessnes. I should have said negligent.
|
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
Quote:
|
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
Quote:
Narf poit chez BOOM spoke of recklessness. I just thought it would help to understand the situation by having a clear understanding of the difference. EDIT: I also thought your commentary on McDonalds was valid and to the point. [ May 30, 2003, 23:51: Message edited by: tbontob ] |
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
Just read the older Posts. Should have done that in the first place.
So McDonalds were found liable. Question is, are they going to appeal the decision? Many a decision has been overturned on appeal. And then overturned again on the next court of appeal. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Whatever the merits of the case, I think the perceived effect an appeal will have on the public will be a major factor in deciding whether to appeal or not. They do have to be careful of not giving the impression of the big corporate giant versus the little guy on the street. Especially when the little guy on the street is a customer. The odds are good that they will opt for better consumer relations, pay up and change their practices. Wonder what they'll do? Put up signs? Prepare two coffees of different temperatures and give the customer the option? Or go back to luke-warm coffee? EDIT: George, the fact that punitive damages were awarded means that the arbitrator (judge, civil jury?) felt that McDonald's was more than just negligent. While there are many reasons for giving punitve damages (such as being callous and uncaring), there very well could have been an adjudication of recklessness in addition to negligence. [ May 31, 2003, 00:52: Message edited by: tbontob ] |
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
"Wonder what they'll do? Put up signs? Prepare two coffees of different temperatures and give the customer the option? Or go back to luke-warm coffee?"
The case has already been resolved. Now you see little "CAUTION: HOT!" signs on everything. Even other places are adding the stupid things. |
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
Quote:
|
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
Either way, SEX will sell big time, but it just becomes a question of false advertising by the fans - which there seem to be a whole lot of! lol
[ May 31, 2003, 15:40: Message edited by: Iggiboo ] |
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
Maybe we should designate certain states as "for stupid people", and such laws, as well as certain media, can exist there. Some other states can be designated "for smart people", where McDonalds might be Banned for entirely different reasons.
PvK |
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
Quote:
Restricting my right to knock your block off for your damn narrow views is another sure path to tyranny. Yes everyone has the right to initiate a lawsuit but they sure don't have the right to steal money from my pockets (ie. tax dollars) by being allowed to proceed with frivolous lawsuits. Judges should and must throw out those frivilous ones. Most countries have no trouble finding the frivolity line. Addendum: Now that Geoschmo has added details on the McD/coffee case, I still say this was a frivilous lawsuit that should never have seen the inside of a courtroom. There seems to be a trend-- no, more than that, a rush-- to have the government and big business take all the responsibility while the individual take none. I don't know how many, but a large number of lawsuits would simply disappear if we all simply took responsibility for our own actions instead of looking for someone else to blame. The sad thing about this trend is that it is encouraged by legislators, the courts and the media, so it won't die out soon. Please note: Kim has no intention of being politically correct; I'm more interested in right and wrong, good and bad. The tone of this post is quite deliberate and intended to get you thinking about the basics instead of nitpicking details. [ May 31, 2003, 20:21: Message edited by: Grandpa Kim ] |
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
I lurk more far more than I post here, but I couldn't resisit a few comments.
First - A few of the "frivolous" lawsuits mentioned here are urban legends, including the woman falling on the soda her son spilled. www.snopes.com The Micky-D lawsuit was presented by the press as an absurd case, but in reality, well, judge for yourself. www.atlanet.org/consumermediaresources/tier3/press_room/facts/frivolous/McdonaldsCoffeecase.aspx In case the link doesn't work, here is the article. ___________________________________________ FACT SHEET: MCDONALD'S SCALDING COFFEE CASE Stella Liebeck of Albuquerque, New Mexico, was in the passenger seat of her grandson's car when she was severely burned by McDonald's coffee in February 1992. Liebeck ordered coffee that was served in a Styrofoam cup at the drive-through window of a local McDonald's. After receiving the order, the grandson pulled his car forward and stopped momentarily so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. (Critics of civil justice, who have pounced on this case, often charge that Liebeck was driving the car or that the vehicle was in motion when she spilled the coffee; neither is true.) Liebeck placed the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the pLastic lid from the cup. As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap. The sweatpants Liebeck was wearing absorbed the coffee and held it next to her skin. A vascular surgeon determined that Liebeck suffered full thickness burns (or third-degree burns) over 6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and genital and groin areas. She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting. Liebeck, who also underwent debridement treatments, sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonald's refused. During discovery, McDonald's produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebeck's. This history documented McDonald's knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard. McDonald's also said during discovery that, based on a consultant's advice, it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees Fahrenheit to maintain optimum taste. Other establishments sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is generally 135 to 140 degrees. Further, McDonald's 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 McDonald's 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 McDonald's had no intention of reducing the "holding temperature" of its coffee. Plaintiff's expert, a scholar in thermodynamics as applied to human skin burns, testified that liquids, at 180 degrees, will cause a full thickness burn to human skin in two to seven seconds. Other testimony showed that as the temperature decreases toward 155 degrees, the extent of the burn relative to that temperature decreases exponentially. Thus, if Liebeck's spill had involved coffee at 155 degrees, the liquid would have cooled and given her time to avoid a serious burn. McDonald's asserted that customers buy coffee on their way to work or home, intending to consume it there. However, the company's own research showed that customers intend to consume the coffee immediately while driving. McDonald's 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 third-degree 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. The jury awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages. This amount was reduced to $160,000 because the jury found Liebeck 20 percent at fault in the spill. The jury also awarded Liebeck $2.7 million in punitive damages, which equals about two days of McDonald's coffee sales. Post-verdict investigation found that the temperature of coffee at the local Albuquerque McDonald's had dropped to 158 degrees Fahrenheit. The trial court subsequently reduced the punitive award to $480,000 -- or three times compensatory damages -- even though the judge called McDonald's conduct reckless, callous and willful. Subsequent to remittitur, the parties entered a post-verdict settlement. |
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
Quote:
Courts often give judgement with $1.00 in damages. It is a way of saying "You are right, but it is a frivolous claim." Or they may give judgement for $1,000,000 for a very simple injury like a cut finger and the plaintiff doesn't think it enough so he appeals the decision. Or it may be a fair award by most standards and the winner feels it is not enough. I am not sure what method your highest Court of Appeals uses in deciding what appeals to hear, but I would suspect that you first need to "Apply for leave to appeal". If leave is granted (which is tantamount to saying they think the appeal has merit), then they can appeal. |
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
Ok, so it was not comprehensive, but it wasn't technically wrong. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif I just missed one part of appealing. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif And as I said, IANAL (I like little-used acronyms that only some people would get http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ).
[ May 31, 2003, 22:33: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ] |
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
i don't advocate throwing out a case without hearing it, i advocate judges with more common sense. i also think we need a more unbiased media. looks like the coffee case wasn't frivilous after all. with 6 billion people on the world, we need a way to get information fast. maybe everyone should have a personalized website?
|
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
Judges do use common sense. But common sense isn't really that common. What seems common sense to you is not necessarily common sense to everyone else.
Most frivolous law suits do get thrown out. Only a small number of them slip through. There are just so many cases that the number of frivolous ones seems huge. |
Re: Space Empires V or ridiculous lawsuits? What is the connection?
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:10 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.