----- In Honor of Stupid People . . .

[GMichael]

I'm not trying to pick a fight or start a debate. In fact, I found this topic humorous. Here are a couple of links that explain the infamous McDonalds hot coffee case in a little more detail. The snopes.com page addresses a slightly different topic and I don't agree with everything said there, but it does provide a synopsis of the coffee case and includes the other link I'm including here. Again, I ain't tryin' to start somethin'. I made a promise to myself that I would stand up for my profession (trial lawyer) by providing more information when necessary. We take a lot of abuse as a profession. Much of it is attributable to propaganda not based on fact. Our civil justice system has its flaws, but those flaws should be addressed in the manner that least affects our right to a trial by jury in civil cases.

http://www.snopes.com/legal/lawsuits.asp

http://caoc.com/CA/index.cfm?event=showPage&pg=facts

How are we supposed to have fun if you keep mucking things up with facts? Geez. I mean, really.

I think there is enough blame to go around. But there have been a few suites that should never have been. What about the one lawyer trying to bring a suit against McD's for selling fattening food? Thank heaven that was thrown out. Why does Bic have that warning on their lighters? Sears on their mowers?
I think we need a "give me a break" clause. When suits like these come to court, the judge should be able to say, "give me a break" and throw it out.
I know this is not a practical answer, but it sure is funny. Hope you don't mind.

[dean_martin]

How are we supposed to have fun if you keep mucking things up with facts? Geez. I mean, really.

I think there is enough blame to go around. But there have been a few suites that should never have been. What about the one lawyer trying to bring a suit against McD's for selling fattening food? Thank heaven that was thrown out. Why does Bic have that warning on their lighters? Sears on their mowers?
I think we need a "give me a break" clause. When suits like these come to court, the judge should be able to say, "give me a break" and throw it out.
I know this is not a practical answer, but it sure is funny. Hope you don't mind.

Most warnings on products are governed by federal regulations, although there are plenty of lawsuits over the adequacy of some product warnings. GM, I think this topic is funny too. I just felt like speaking up when JM hyperbolized that all product warnings are due to frivolous lawsuits.

About the obesity lawsuit - that was a law professor and his students that filed that lawsuit against several fast food chains. It was thrown out. People have tried to use the courts to implement social change for many years. Most of the time they fail because it's not the right place. I have found it interesting though that after that lawsuit McDs announced it was going to use a different type of oil for its fries and that it was going to provide more nutritional information for the items on its menu.

Most of the time the courts get it right and weed out suspect claims. Judges are authorized to award the other side their costs for having to defend these claims. I get suspiscious of knee-jerk reactions that include legislation banning these types of claims when the courts can take care of them. What if you get food poisoning, HIV/AIDS or hepatitis from a fast food place, but find you can't sue them because a law was passed banning lawsuits against fast food places for the quality of their food?

As for the warnings on the BIC lighter and the Sears mower, I don't know why they're there. I do agree that there are a lot of dumb people walking around. Product warnings has become a highly specialized field. If the product's warning is not prescribed by the government, then the product's warning is probably based on studies of human behavior. That says quite a bit about the general population.

[GMichael]

Most warnings on products are governed by federal regulations, although there are plenty of lawsuits over the adequacy of some product warnings. GM, I think this topic is funny too. I just felt like speaking up when JM hyperbolized that all product warnings are due to frivolous lawsuits.

About the obesity lawsuit - that was a law professor and his students that filed that lawsuit against several fast food chains. It was thrown out. People have tried to use the courts to implement social change for many years. Most of the time they fail because it's not the right place. I have found it interesting though that after that lawsuit McDs announced it was going to use a different type of oil for its fries and that it was going to provide more nutritional information for the items on its menu.

Most of the time the courts get it right and weed out suspect claims. Judges are authorized to award the other side their costs for having to defend these claims. I get suspiscious of knee-jerk reactions that include legislation banning these types of claims when the courts can take care of them. What if you get food poisoning, HIV/AIDS or hepatitis from a fast food place, but find you can't sue them because a law was passed banning lawsuits against fast food places for the quality of their food?

As for the warnings on the BIC lighter and the Sears mower, I don't know why they're there. I do agree that there are a lot of dumb people walking around. Product warnings has become a highly specialized field. If the product's warning is not prescribed by the government, then the product's warning is probably based on studies of human behavior. That says quite a bit about the general population.

I'm sorry Dean, but I don't see anything funny in your post. That will cost you.

Just joking. You can be the voice of reason. It's nice to have a few thought out thoughts thinking around us thoughtless thinkers. Ya think?

[dean_martin]

I'm sorry Dean, but I don't see anything funny in your post. That will cost you.

Yeah, I know. I regret putting a damper on this lighthearted thread. I know JohnMichael didn't mean anything personal - how could he? I didn't want to come across as being offended because I wasn't.

Anyhow, I used to have a collection of photographs of unsafe work conditions that were hilarious. (I think I lost them in a computer crash.) If I can track them down I will post them. I remember one that showed a construction worker working on lighting over an indoor pool. The lights were on, he was on an aluminum ladder and the ladder was in the pool which of course was filled with water. I'm sure I know someone who has a collection of stupid warnings. Maybe I can add to rather than detract from this thread.

[GMichael]

Yeah, I know. I regret putting a damper on this lighthearted thread. I know JohnMichael didn't mean anything personal - how could he? I didn't want to come across as being offended because I wasn't.

Anyhow, I used to have a collection of photographs of unsafe work conditions that were hilarious. (I think I lost them in a computer crash.) If I can track them down I will post them. I remember one that showed a construction worker working on lighting over an indoor pool. The lights were on, he was on an aluminum ladder and the ladder was in the pool which of course was filled with water. I'm sure I know someone who has a collection of stupid warnings. Maybe I can add to rather than detract from this thread.

You never detract from a conversation Dean.

I remember seeing an email about 6 years ago that had a bunch of descriptions from real insurance reports. It was great. It's long gone from my joke list now but I still remember a few.

"The tree kept moving. I had to swerve several times before I finally hit it."
"I pulled into a driveway that wasn't mine and hit a tree that wasn't there."
"This blue car appeared out of nowhere, hit me, then disappeared."
"I saw a slow moving, sad faced gentleman, as he bounced off my windshield."

[GMichael]

We can't leave the Darwin Awards off this thread. Here's one to start.

Failed Frame-Up
2005 Darwin Award Nominee
Confirmed True by Darwin
(19 March 2005, Michigan) "Unusual" and "complicated" is how the Missaukee County sheriff described the mysterious death of 19-year-old Christopher, who called 911 at 1:22am and calmly informed the police dispatcher that his neighbor had stabbed him. Suddenly he began screaming and begging for help. A woman was heard shouting in the background, "Why did you do this?" Deputies arrived quickly, only to find that Christopher had bled to death from stab wounds to his chest.
After an evening spent imbibing large quantities of alcohol, Christopher noticed a shortage in his liquor supply that could not be attributed to his own depredations. He concluded that his neighbor had stolen a bottle of booze! He menaced said neighbor with a knife, to no avail, whereupon he retired to his own apartment to brood about revenge.

Finally he figured out the perfect way to get back at that conniving bottle-thief: he would stab himself and blame the neighbor!

A witness saw Christopher enter the bathroom while he called police. When he emerged from the bathroom, he looked perfectly fine, but a moment later he began screaming as gouts of blood spewed from his chest. He ran to the door of the apartment, and collapsed.

The evidence pointed to self-inflicted wounds. Deputies found the knife that killed him in the kitchen, and an autopsy concluded that he had stabbed himself in the chest twice. The first wound may not have looked dangerous enough to him, so he took the knife and tried again, this time plunging it into his left ventricle. This wound was plenty dangerous: he had only two minutes to live.

Christopher died in vain. His deathbed accusation fell on deaf ears, as a witness stated that the neighbor was not in the apartment, and the neighbor offered to take a lie-detector test to demonstrate his innocence. All Christopher got for revenge was an accidental death sentence.

Here is the link: http://www.darwinawards.com/darwin/i...arwin2005.html

[JohnMichael]

Yeah, I know. I regret putting a damper on this lighthearted thread. I know JohnMichael didn't mean anything personal - how could he? I didn't want to come across as being offended because I wasn't.

Anyhow, I used to have a collection of photographs of unsafe work conditions that were hilarious. (I think I lost them in a computer crash.) If I can track them down I will post them. I remember one that showed a construction worker working on lighting over an indoor pool. The lights were on, he was on an aluminum ladder and the ladder was in the pool which of course was filled with water. I'm sure I know someone who has a collection of stupid warnings. Maybe I can add to rather than detract from this thread.

No, I did not mean anything personal towards you or attornteys in general. I was thinking of some people I knew who were always watching for someone to sue as a get rich quick scheme if they were not able to win the lottery. You may not know this but I worked in healthcare for 15 years both in patient care and management. Someone was always threatening to sue us. Then when I was in management and you fired someone they would always tell you their lawyer would be calling. They never did of course but I was always glad we had first class representation if there ever was a suit. So believe me the legal team we had made us feel more confident in what we were doing and kept us informed so we did not do anything wrong.

[dean_martin]

No, I did not mean anything personal towards you or attornteys in general. I was thinking of some people I knew who were always watching for someone to sue as a get rich quick scheme if they were not able to win the lottery. You may not know this but I worked in healthcare for 15 years both in patient care and management. Someone was always threatening to sue us. Then when I was in management and you fired someone they would always tell you their lawyer would be calling. They never did of course but I was always glad we had first class representation if there ever was a suit. So believe me the legal team we had made us feel more confident in what we were doing and kept us informed so we did not do anything wrong.

Yep - good screening turns away a lot of got-no-case-big-talkers. Speaking of healthcare, we've also met with many people who believed their or their loved ones' doctors committed malpractice, but after speaking with them for a while we realized that the doctor simply had a poor bedside manner.

[Bernd]

Most warnings on products are governed by federal regulations, although there are plenty of lawsuits over the adequacy of some product warnings. GM, I think this topic is funny too. I just felt like speaking up when JM hyperbolized that all product warnings are due to frivolous lawsuits.

About the obesity lawsuit - that was a law professor and his students that filed that lawsuit against several fast food chains. It was thrown out. People have tried to use the courts to implement social change for many years. Most of the time they fail because it's not the right place. I have found it interesting though that after that lawsuit McDs announced it was going to use a different type of oil for its fries and that it was going to provide more nutritional information for the items on its menu.

Most of the time the courts get it right and weed out suspect claims. Judges are authorized to award the other side their costs for having to defend these claims. I get suspiscious of knee-jerk reactions that include legislation banning these types of claims when the courts can take care of them. What if you get food poisoning, HIV/AIDS or hepatitis from a fast food place, but find you can't sue them because a law was passed banning lawsuits against fast food places for the quality of their food?

As for the warnings on the BIC lighter and the Sears mower, I don't know why they're there. I do agree that there are a lot of dumb people walking around. Product warnings has become a highly specialized field. If the product's warning is not prescribed by the government, then the product's warning is probably based on studies of human behavior. That says quite a bit about the general population.

Hi Dean,

Good point. It's important that the courts and the Jury system stay accesible for all. Over here most of the Trials are now without a jury and it's very dodgy. A Jury has wisdom in my opinion.
These dfferent points of view make these lighthearted threads so interesting for me,as you can learn a great deal from them.
Anybody ever read "The Global Brain"? He talks about the Earth is like a Brian and the different PC terminals are like Briancells connecting with one another. Most interesting.

The B.O.T. is coming up here and it's time to start the day. Good Morning everybody.

Peace

Bernd

[GMichael]

Hey Bernd,

How's it going? Enjoy that B.O.T. It's out here too. But it's still only 20F. Brrrr... We got a half inch of snow a week ago and it's still here. More on the way tonight.

Hi Dean,

Did you find that "collection of photographs of unsafe work conditions that were hilarious" yet?