Good Thursday Morning Chuckle

[Kamal]

-- A scooter with the warning "This product moves when used."

-- A digital thermometer with the advice "Once used rectally, the thermometer should not be used orally."

-- An electric blender used for chopping and dicing that reminds users to " "Never remove food or other items from the blades while the product is operating."

-- And a three-inch bag of air used for packaging that read "Do not use this product as a toy, pillow, or flotation device."

http://money.cnn.com/2005/01/06/news/funny/warning_labels/index.htm?cnn=yes

-e-

[thesightless]

you seem to be forgetting about that nitwit who sued Mcdonalds after she burned herself when spilling hot coffee on herself. edit opinion.
now cups of hot coffee have to have a warning saying "hot coffee may be extremely hot"

[Civic_Zen]

I think this needs to be moved to the politics section now, thanks sightless. :wink:

But seriously, your absolutely right. Liberals want a new law created for every new thing that comes up, and a new warning on anything that might do us harm. Thanks for making this world such a safe place for people that are dumb enough to "pull food from blades while product is operating."

Move now in progress.

[Yao]

I really can't understand why they want those laws, wtf, are we all retarded or something?

It hasn't come this far in Europe yet, although you should be able to find some nice examples here, too...

[Mr.Big]

America the sueing nation....it is ridiculous...

I heard a story of some guy sticking is campervan on cruise control on the freeway and then goin back and making a cup of coffee, crashing and then sueing the car company cause it wasnt in the manuel..

fuck that the judge should be hung for letting fuckers like that win..

[toasty]

I'm not going to suggest that there aren't some absurd cases out there and some absurd warnings that spring from fear of liability, but keep a couple of things in mind:

1. Anyone can file a lawsuit. Today. Right now. You don't need a lawyer. You can allege whatever you want, get it on file, and away you go. That doesn't mean you're going to win, it doesn't mean the allegations are true, it doesn't mean that you're ever going to see a dime. You always here about it when people file these cases, but you never hear about it when the case gets thrown out of court for having no merit. If, heaven forbid, someone does win what seems to be an absurd case, you never hear about it when the verdict is lowered or reversed by the trial judge, or the case is overturned on appeal. Those things aren't newsworthy or interesting -- "Man Who Files Bullshit Case Loses" doesn't sell papers.

I had a case once that actually got some national attention when filed where I was defending a manufacturer of reclining chairs. The plaintiff alleged that the chair was defective and threw her to the ground TWICE. One the second occasion, the chair, after flinging her to the ground, rolled over onto her and pinned her to the ground where she spent an entire evening before she was able to extricate herself from the situation. It was the most ridiculous case I've ever participated in.

What happened, you might ask? The case was dismissed, as it should have been. The press didn't pick up that story, though, with good reason.

2. Some of the cases that seem ridiculous when boiled down to a soundbite actually have some merit when you have all of the facts available. The McDonald's coffee case is actually a pretty good example of this -- although the evidence didn't support a verdict of the size that was awarded, it did support liability. The amount of the verdict was reduced by the court, the plaintiff was assessed 80% fault, and McDonalds did not appeal.

For my part, my all time favorite warning was on a Batman costume:

"Caution: Cape does not enable user to fly"

[Jenks]

I'm not going to suggest that there aren't some absurd cases out there....

....Anyone can file a lawsuit. Today. Right now. You don't need a lawyer.

^perfect example of both right here...


LOS ANGELES (Reuters) ? Wed Jan 5, 2005 04:03 PM ET

Watching contestants eat dead rats on NBC's gross-out stunt show "Fear Factor" so disgusted a Cleveland man that he has sued NBC for $2.5 million, saying he could not stomach what he saw.

In a handwritten four-page lawsuit filed in federal court in Cleveland on Tuesday, paralegal Austin Aitken said, "To have the individuals on the show eat (yes) and drink dead rats was crazy and from a viewer's point of view made me throw-up as well an another in the house at the same time."

His suit added, "NBC is sending the wrong message to its TV watchers that cash can make or have people do just about anything beyond reasoning (sic) and in most cases against their will."

He said the show caused his blood pressure to rise so high that he became dizzy and light-headed, and when he ran away to his room, he bumped his head into the doorway.

In a brief telephone interview with Reuters, Aitken said, "I am not at liberty to discuss the complaint unless it is a paid-interview situation."

[Yao]

I had a fucking good laugh on this one, I'll tell ya. This is unbelieveablr, this is why they invented REMOTE CONTROL, stupid a-hole...It really is just a weak try to get some money out of it. A that is often the case, I'll bet. Just trying to get rich overnight, and the system allows it...

[toasty]

Just trying to get rich overnight, and the system allows it...

I think you're half right here, Yao. The system allows you to try, but that doesn't mean you're going to be successful. That he sued for $2.5M doesn't mean he recovered a thing. The press puts a lot of emphasis on the amount that is sued for -- as a matter of practice, though, unless it is a contract case where you are suing for a specific liquidated amount, that number is often completely arbitrary or is just a number inserted to satisfy some procedural requirement. You could just as easily ask for "eleventy billion dollars."

Here in Missouri, to avoid the press grasping on to and making a big deal out of what is truly an artificial figure, we are not allowed to ask for a specific amount in court papers. We just ask for "an amount fair and reasonable as determined by a jury" since that's what the case is truly worth anyway.

[toasty]

Re: Good Thursday Morning Chuckle

Some more truly frivilous litigation:

Prisoner and frequent litigant Matthew Washington was sanctioned for his excessive motion practice. Following a history of filing of motions that began with simple "Motions to Amend" various pleadings, he began filing more arcane motions, including:

Motion to Behoove an Inquisition
Motion for Publicity
Motion for Restoration of Sanity
Motion for Psychoanalysis
Motion to Renounce Citizenship
Motion for Catered Food Services

All of these motions were overshadowed, however, by his Motion to Kiss My Ass, in which he moved "all Americans at large and one corrupt Judge Smith [to] kiss my got [sic] damn ass sorry mother fucker you." I have to admit that there have been times that I've wanted to tell a judge to kiss my ass, but this knucklehead actually did it. As you might suspect, his motion was denied, and he was sanctioned -- not for offending the judge, mind you, but because all of these motions, ridiculous though they may be, required the efforts of the court and counsel to respond to and rule upon.

The decision is completely deadpan and a riot if you're into that sort of thing. It can be found at 934 F. Supp. 1395 (S.D. Ga. 1996) if you'd like to read it.

In another case that serves as a poster child for frivilous litigation, Gerlad Mayo sued Satan & His Staff for placing obstacles in his path and causing his downfall. Unfortunately, he was unable to find the defendants to serve them, and the case was dismissed. That one is at 54 F.R.D. 282 (W.D. Pa. 1971).

[rubyraks]

whatever happened to Darwin's law of survival of the fittest? seriously, if people are that dumb why warn them. They're just bringing the average intelligence down and any harm they do to themselves could only help the human race. If they're that dumb, do we really need them around? Could they possibly contribute anything of value to society?

[Yao]

I'm not a law student Toasty, but it's interesting to learn something about it...

Funny story, some people are just totally deranged! Though...what exactly is a motion? I don't know the translation in Dutch, so it might be something I already know, but then I can't connect it...I get the global picture, he's filing cases to obtain those rights, isn't it?

Anyhow..Restoration of Sanity...Renouncing citizenship. That guy is nuts.

[toasty]

A motion is when you are asking the court to do something in a case that is already pending. As compared to a petition or complaint, which is the pleading that is filed that commences a case and asks for the ultimate relief that you are seeking, a motion is when you are asking the court to grant you relief in the context of an existing case and is normally used for procedural matters.

[thesightless]

LOOKS LIKE toasty is abusing his westlaw research rights!

[Yao]

A motion is when you are asking the court to do something in a case that is already pending. As compared to a petition or complaint, which is the pleading that is filed that commences a case and asks for the ultimate relief that you are seeking, a motion is when you are asking the court to grant you relief in the context of an existing case and is normally used for procedural matters.

I think I get the point...

So all these motions were requests done in a pending case? Maybe to stall it, or just to irritate the judge and/or the jury...