Outrageous Lawsuits...

[MasterOfPuppets]

here's one of my favorites...

Couple sues McDonald's over hot pickle

Monday, October 9, 2000

SCRIPPS HOWARD NEWS SERVICE

KNOXVILLE, Tenn. -- A Knoxville couple has filed a $125,000 lawsuit against a local McDonald's restaurant, claiming the woman was burned on the chin by a hot pickle.

The two-page document contends that Veronica Martin was injured by an allegedly dangerous and defective product -- in this case, a small McDonald's hamburger -- causing her to suffer both physical and mental injuries.

Those injuries include a second-degree burn on Martin's chin that left a permanent scar.

The suit filed by Veronica and Darrin Martin claims "the hamburger sold by the (McDonald's) was in a defective condition or unreasonably dangerous to the general consumer and in particular to (Veronica Martin.)"

According to the suit, the events leading up to Veronica Martin's injury began on Oct. 6, 1999, when she and her husband bought several small hamburgers at the restaurant.

Veronica Martin seeks $110,000 in damages. Darren Martin, who the lawsuit states "has been deprived of the services and consortium of his wife," seeks $15,000.

the husband was suing because his wife was "unable" to perform her wifely duties... .....

[steelreserve]

Originally Posted by MasterOfPuppets

here's one of my favorites...


the husband was suing because his wife was "unable" to perform her wifely duties... .....

Hey, good for him, if he can get some money out of what usually happens anyway as soon as you move in together.

[sixstringlass]

I was actually intrigued by the ad on the actual Stella Awards site:

http://www.mypetlawyer.com/

[revefsreleets]

Why does McD's always get sued? Easy they are a mega-conglomerate with gobs and gobs of cash...they'll actually probably have to settle this POS lawsuit because it will cost more to defend against it.

Here's super easy tort reform in action. Have the judge be able to throw these cases out WITHOUT A LAWYER HAVING TO ASK FOR THE CASE TO BE DISMISSED. The judge can just look at the case and say "This is bullshit, I'm throwing it out, and fining the plaintiff $5000 for filing a frivolous suit".

Enact THAT kind of simple solution and watch the amount of silly suits drop to next to none...

[SteelersinCA]

Yeah but the problem is you don't know on the face. Take Ben's case for example. On the face of the suit, she has as good of a shot at winning as he does. Now as discovery comes out, she looks more and more crazy. The expensive part of litigation is discovery. The trial is the easy part. It's hard to get a good look at the case until discovery is done. About the only thing you can do is cap jury awards, otherwise people don't get their day in court.

[revefsreleets]

Originally Posted by SteelersinCA

Yeah but the problem is you don't know on the face. Take Ben's case for example. On the face of the suit, she has as good of a shot at winning as he does. Now as discovery comes out, she looks more and more crazy. The expensive part of litigation is discovery. The trial is the easy part. It's hard to get a good look at the case until discovery is done. About the only thing you can do is cap jury awards, otherwise people don't get their day in court.

A hot pickle, though?

[Godfather]

Originally Posted by revefsreleets

Why does McD's always get sued? Easy they are a mega-conglomerate with gobs and gobs of cash...they'll actually probably have to settle this POS lawsuit because it will cost more to defend against it.

Here's super easy tort reform in action. Have the judge be able to throw these cases out WITHOUT A LAWYER HAVING TO ASK FOR THE CASE TO BE DISMISSED. The judge can just look at the case and say "This is bullshit, I'm throwing it out, and fining the plaintiff $5000 for filing a frivolous suit".

Enact THAT kind of simple solution and watch the amount of silly suits drop to next to none...

That would be a good solution.

Of course we already have Rule 11 and don't enforce it.

[revefsreleets]

Yeah, I mean, I think when you file the original complaint or whatever, it needs to include some basic info.

Maybe we do like a grand jury inquiry, but instead of "peers" it's just a judicial review board, and they review cases and bind over the few with merit and dump out the shit (which I'm guessing is 90% of what gets processed).

The trial lawyers would HATE this, because it would essentially force most of them to move on to the only other thing they are qualified to do, which is shill used cars at the local JD Byryder writing buy here/pay here loans at 24%, but, eff em! They should have studied to be engineers instead...

[Godfather]

Florida has a good rule. If you turn down a reasonable settlement offer and then lose, you pay the other side's legal fees. That discourages lottery verdicts without having a chilling effect on legitimate cases.

[steelreserve]

Originally Posted by revefsreleets

Why does McD's always get sued? Easy they are a mega-conglomerate with gobs and gobs of cash...they'll actually probably have to settle this POS lawsuit because it will cost more to defend against it.

Here's super easy tort reform in action. Have the judge be able to throw these cases out WITHOUT A LAWYER HAVING TO ASK FOR THE CASE TO BE DISMISSED. The judge can just look at the case and say "This is bullshit, I'm throwing it out, and fining the plaintiff $5000 for filing a frivolous suit".

Enact THAT kind of simple solution and watch the amount of silly suits drop to next to none...

That, or a cap on what lawyers can make working on contingency. If they could only charge a flat rate instead of 30-40% of the total haul, a lot of the bullshit would dry up too.