Apple, Jobs, AT&T sued over iPhone price cut, rebates

nyc_rock

Member
Bronze
Jul 6, 2007
340
0
16
Loser Pays is the answer to frivolous lawsuits!

Also, legal fees are often footed by the ambulance chasers themselves in return for 40% or more of the winnings or settlement.

The Democrats would never let that happen.
 

iPaul

New Member
Bronze
Jun 25, 2007
176
0
0
Minneapolis
What we need in this country / world is extreme darwinism. Survival of the fittest. Stop putting warnings on things and let the people systematically weed themselves out.

I know this forum is comprised of intelligent, smart people. When we buy a cup of coffee we know it will be very hot. Who drinks cold coffee (unless its iced coffee from Dunkin')? If we go to a store and they are out of what we want....we go to another store or wait for a shipment...we don't sue!

If we weed out these morons the world might be a better place. Although, these frivolous lawsuits are probably just a direct result of the human gene pool being heavily diluted.

Ah! What are you gonna do? :mad:

GREAT IDEA!

So... is it okay if we stack some of the bodies in your backyard?
 

Hondamaker

Genius
Gold
May 14, 2007
9,946
655
113
59
Fairborn, Ohio
yep shes the one. She was the idiot who spilled it on herself. Was she expecting the coffee to be cold? Last time I checked, Mcdonalds just recently started selling "iced premium roast coffee". Shame on her for her own stupidity and negligence and suing mcdonalds.
Right on, Kevin, right on!
 

Hondamaker

Genius
Gold
May 14, 2007
9,946
655
113
59
Fairborn, Ohio
What we need in this country / world is extreme darwinism. Survival of the fittest. Stop putting warnings on things and let the people systematically weed themselves out.

I know this forum is comprised of intelligent, smart people. When we buy a cup of coffee we know it will be very hot. Who drinks cold coffee (unless its iced coffee from Dunkin')? If we go to a store and they are out of what we want....we go to another store or wait for a shipment...we don't sue!

If we weed out these morons the world might be a better place. Although, these frivolous lawsuits are probably just a direct result of the human gene pool being heavily diluted.

Ah! What are you gonna do? :mad:
Hit the nail on the head with that one. It's a craze that started so many years ago, and is still prevalent today....sue over anything.
 

burniksapwet

Member
Silver
Jul 5, 2007
553
0
16
ummmm........didn't she win that one?

and as a result.............most will now spell out on the cup of coffee......something along the lines that it is hot.........

what we really need is to implement the UK process of lawsuits, that is if you initiate a lawsuit and lose, not only do you pay your own legal fees but all the fees of the party that you are suing. This would discourage frivolous lawsuits
That is what's happening to one local businesss here which is quite sad.:( Bare in mind that they tried everything to accommodate them but the guy wasn't having any of it.
 

Tinman

Evangelist
Gold
Jul 16, 2007
4,334
183
63
Aridzona
Nothing beats the "judge" who sued the dry cleaners in Jersey. And although he lost, the owners bailed out of their businesss anyway. No winners in that one.


HOWEVER, please do not use the McDonald's case as an example of lawsuits run amok. Media widely misreported this case due to its headlines-grabbing nature. The real story was much different:

"79-year old Stella Liebeck and her grandson stopped by a McDonald's drive-through. Liebeck bought a cup of coffee, served in a styrofoam cup. She was sitting in the back seat of the car. When they had pulled out of the driveway, the grandson stopped for a moment so Liebeck could open the lid and put sugar and cream in her coffee (note: I've read several newspaper articles claiming that she was trying to open the cup while driving). The lid was stuck, so she tried to hold the cup with her knees while pulling the lid open with both her hands (which is very understandable, seeing as she's a weak elderly woman). As she removed the lid, the contents of the cup were spilled in her lap.

She was wearing a pair of sweatpants, which absorbed the coffee, and held it next to her skin.

Now, here's the kicker: THE COFFEE WAS NOT HOT.
It was SCALDING.

The coffee was around 85° C (185° F). Normal household coffee is about 60° C (140° F).

The coffee gave her third-degree burns over 6% of her body - her inner thighs, groin and buttocks. She had to be hospitalized for over a week, and had to undergo skin grafting. She had to pay 11,000 dollars for the treatment. And she's still crippled.

Liebeck sought to settle her claim for just her medical bills. McDonald's refused. They actually countered with an offer of 800 bucks.

During discovery, more than 700 claims from other people burned by McDonald's scalding coffee were produced. Many of them had stories similar to that of Stella Liebeck's. Before this was made known, McDonald's representatives lied to the court and jury about the existence of other claims. The claims documented that McDonald's were fully aware of the problem and its extent.

McDonald's Quality Assurance Manager also admitted during discovery that their POLICY was to hold their coffee at about 85° C in the pot (give or take a few degrees). This was based on a consultant's advice - he said that it'd maintain optimum taste longer after being taken out of the pot. Any coffee served directly from the pot WOULD in most cases cause burns to mouth and throat, and they knew it. The manager also testified that there is a burn hazard with any food/drink served at above 60° C (140° F), and that McDonald's coffee WAS NOT at all FIT FOR CONSUMPTION. He also testified that McDonald's had no intention to lower their holding temperature.

Other testimony showed that liquids at 85° would cause a full thickness burn to human skin in 2-7 seconds.

The jury awarded Liebeck 200,000 dollars, which was then reduced to 160,000 - the jury found Liebeck 20% at fault in the spill. The jury also awarded Liebeck $2.7 million in punitive damages. This sounds like a lot of money, but keep in mind that McDonald's makes 1.3 million dollars daily on coffee ONLY.

The trial court reduced the punitive award to $480,000 - or three times compensatory damages - even though the judge called McDonalds' conduct reckless, callous and willful.

Now, this is what really gets to me. The media has constantly said that "This is a sign of how bad things are in the US today blah blah blah people get awarded money for not knowing that you shouldn't spill coffee in your lap blah blah blah lawyers are morons blah blah blah only the newbie journalists check their facts first".

The thing that's REALLY a sign of how bad things are today is the fact that the media can not only lie to the general public, but also keep the truth quiet so effectively that EVEN THOUGH THE INFORMATION HAS BEEN READILY AVAILABLE FOR YEARS, your average John Doe will still think that it was all a clumsy lady taking advantage of a broken system."


--
Mike
 

burniksapwet

Member
Silver
Jul 5, 2007
553
0
16
Nothing beats the "judge" who sued the dry cleaners in Jersey. And although he lost, the owners bailed out of their businesss anyway. No winners in that one.


HOWEVER, please do not use the McDonald's case as an example of lawsuits run amok. Media widely misreported this case due to its headlines-grabbing nature. The real story was much different:

"79-year old Stella Liebeck and her grandson stopped by a McDonald's drive-through. Liebeck bought a cup of coffee, served in a styrofoam cup. She was sitting in the back seat of the car. When they had pulled out of the driveway, the grandson stopped for a moment so Liebeck could open the lid and put sugar and cream in her coffee (note: I've read several newspaper articles claiming that she was trying to open the cup while driving). The lid was stuck, so she tried to hold the cup with her knees while pulling the lid open with both her hands (which is very understandable, seeing as she's a weak elderly woman). As she removed the lid, the contents of the cup were spilled in her lap.

She was wearing a pair of sweatpants, which absorbed the coffee, and held it next to her skin.

Now, here's the kicker: THE COFFEE WAS NOT HOT.
It was SCALDING.

The coffee was around 85° C (185° F). Normal household coffee is about 60° C (140° F).

The coffee gave her third-degree burns over 6% of her body - her inner thighs, groin and buttocks. She had to be hospitalized for over a week, and had to undergo skin grafting. She had to pay 11,000 dollars for the treatment. And she's still crippled.

Liebeck sought to settle her claim for just her medical bills. McDonald's refused. They actually countered with an offer of 800 bucks.

During discovery, more than 700 claims from other people burned by McDonald's scalding coffee were produced. Many of them had stories similar to that of Stella Liebeck's. Before this was made known, McDonald's representatives lied to the court and jury about the existence of other claims. The claims documented that McDonald's were fully aware of the problem and its extent.

McDonald's Quality Assurance Manager also admitted during discovery that their POLICY was to hold their coffee at about 85° C in the pot (give or take a few degrees). This was based on a consultant's advice - he said that it'd maintain optimum taste longer after being taken out of the pot. Any coffee served directly from the pot WOULD in most cases cause burns to mouth and throat, and they knew it. The manager also testified that there is a burn hazard with any food/drink served at above 60° C (140° F), and that McDonald's coffee WAS NOT at all FIT FOR CONSUMPTION. He also testified that McDonald's had no intention to lower their holding temperature.

Other testimony showed that liquids at 85° would cause a full thickness burn to human skin in 2-7 seconds.

The jury awarded Liebeck 200,000 dollars, which was then reduced to 160,000 - the jury found Liebeck 20% at fault in the spill. The jury also awarded Liebeck $2.7 million in punitive damages. This sounds like a lot of money, but keep in mind that McDonald's makes 1.3 million dollars daily on coffee ONLY.

The trial court reduced the punitive award to $480,000 - or three times compensatory damages - even though the judge called McDonalds' conduct reckless, callous and willful.

Now, this is what really gets to me. The media has constantly said that "This is a sign of how bad things are in the US today blah blah blah people get awarded money for not knowing that you shouldn't spill coffee in your lap blah blah blah lawyers are morons blah blah blah only the newbie journalists check their facts first".

The thing that's REALLY a sign of how bad things are today is the fact that the media can not only lie to the general public, but also keep the truth quiet so effectively that EVEN THOUGH THE INFORMATION HAS BEEN READILY AVAILABLE FOR YEARS, your average John Doe will still think that it was all a clumsy lady taking advantage of a broken system."


--
Mike
As always tin, another good post.