Well he's suing because he eats like a pig and busted a tooth in the process and now wants to profit off of it. So yeah he's a whiny <archaic vulgarism>.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
Printable View
Well he's suing because he eats like a pig and busted a tooth in the process and now wants to profit off of it. So yeah he's a whiny <archaic vulgarism>.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
It's my totally ignorant gut feeling, to be honest. Probably beacuse I've bit down on something unexpected before, and wasn't willing to sue and claim mental suffering.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
Also, because the incident seemingly occurred in early 2008, over two and a half years ago and he's suing now. Did it take two years for him to get all the paperwork together?
As someone above mentioned, it's an olive pit in an olive. He didn't find a human thumb, or rat feces, or anything else that might have indicated gross negligence on the part of the food provider.
Unless he busted a tooth in half, then I don't really see the amounts requested lining up with the damages received.
As far as the "putting monetary value on someone else's pain", we all do that.
If he asked for 10,000,000,000 dollars, would you say the same? Would you then argue that we couldn't possibly put a monetary value on him missing out on life's enjoyments? Of course not.
Given the price of the suit, Kucinich set a price on the value of these things himself. We're just questioning his judgment, and rightfully so.
So you admit your reasoning is PFA. That's a start.Quote:
Originally Posted by LnGrrrR
More fiat here. How does the timing affect the validity of the merits, at all?Quote:
Originally Posted by LnGrrrR
As mentioned in the OP, it was an olive pit in a sandwich.Quote:
Originally Posted by LnGrrrR
Isn't it reasonable to assume that sandwiches we are sold by commercial establishments will be free of olive pits, chicken bones, ball bearings, broken glass and other impedimenta?
Unless you can show us he didn't, you're basically admitting you have no sound basis to assume the damages are excessive.Quote:
Originally Posted by LnGrrrR
I dunno Winehole. I had my entire lower jaw rebuilt after a motorcycle accident...fake teeth and the whole nine yards. It was about 15k.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
I lost a shitload of "enjoyment of life" and probably incurred some amount of pain and suffering. I'm no masochist (despite my frequent postings here:lol), but I'm not sure I'd feel entitled to get rich off of it.
What does PFA mean? Pure fucking awesomeness?
Kucinich has a hot wife, right? If he got depressed and couldn't get it up ... well, I suppose there might be some suffering that goes along with the frustration.
Who was at fault?Quote:
Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue
If it was somebody else's fault, you wouldn't have sued? And because you wouldn't, a US Rep shouldn't?Quote:
Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue
(Just trying to tease out the reasoning here, such as it is.)
PFA = "pulled from air"
The driver of an 1968 Oldsmobile Vista Cruiser. You know, if I'm gonna get hit, it might as well be by a big car.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Did they pay you anything?
I don't claim to have any particular rationale at work here...just my take on the Kucinich event. As for suing....I was made whole by the insurance...the rest is part and parcel to breathing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
Their insurance paid for my dental reconstruction....and fixed my bike.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Well there you go. Kucinich might settle for less than the suit calls for, and suing for $150k doesn't exactly seem like a get rich quick scheme.
Yeah, 150k aint exactly the jackpot, but it aint chicken feed either. I guess the whole notion of suing for loss of enjoyment makes me look sideways at it a bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
I'm not even sure what the hell loss of enjoyment means in this context.
Just seems like a different phrasing for pain and suffering.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue
That was listed in addition to pain and suffering.Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
Thanks for keeping your post short. That was a kindness to us all.Quote:
Originally Posted by sickdsm
Listing 150,000 is probably a statutory number rather than the amount he will actually seek and receive. Its not uncommon in PI cases where you have to meet a threshold of 2-4,000 in damages before you sue, but in places like Kansas you sue for $75,000 because that is the statutory amount. Most minor PI cases will never come close to that, but you request that amount in the petition.
DUring discovery, most defendants will submit a document that requires the plaintiff to state their specific damages. At this point, them amount usually comes down unless the medical bills hit 150,000.
There is nothing wrong with someone suing when they suffer legitimate damages. Even a congressman.
Well, at least that is honest. :tuQuote:
Originally Posted by SnakeBoy
That is on you. You had the right to sue and you settled for less. There is nothing wrong with that, it was just your preference. However, you would have been justified in seeking monetary compensation. Yo would not have made millions but you would have recovered more than your bills.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue
I try to admit my bias occasionally.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
Timing can affect many issues. For instance, I believe that in some cases, if you don't report a problem within a certain timeframe, then you're viewed as having "accepted" said service. As an example, say that a worker is supposed to be on time at 8:00, but he often comes in at 8:10 to 8:15.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
Now, I don't verbally counsel him, I don't reprimand him, I don't do anything. Then, two years after working for me, I suddenly fire him for not showing up on time.
He could point to the lack of standard enforcement as a reason why he didn't show up on time. Because he had ignored the issue for so long, he gives the impression he "accepted" it.
Again, using your argument, do you think there should be no "statue of limitations" on it? That he should be able to sue for this problem, say, 25 years from now? I doubt you would argue that.
First off, caveat emptor. Second, there is a big difference between an olive containing a pit, and an olive containing, say, broken glass. I'm sure you are aware of that and are just playing Devil's Advocate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
Did said establishment guarantee that all food served would be free from possible injury?
If Kucinich swallowed something the wrong way, and then choked on it, would the restaurant be at fault for not cutting up his food into smaller pieces as well?
Hogwash. I'm opining as is everyone is. You make it sound as if the number that Kucinich bandied about is some solid number. As you stated above, it is hard to put a price on damages, especially emotional/mental ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
I have no more "sound basis" to counter his claims of monetary damages than you do for agreeing with it. I'm not denying that the man suffered damage, and I'm not denying that the restaurant may have some small amount of culpability. I'm denying that their culpability, and Kucinich's damages, are equal to such a high amount.
the Food and Drug Administration's stunningly poetic-sounding "Food Defect Action Levels" -- the level of screwiness you are allowed to have in your food before the FDA will take action. You never actually want to get some FDA action, but you might be surprised at how much gunk can be in your product before they will show up with some bad news.
Say you're a frozen broccoli processor. Can you guess how many aphids, thrips, and/or mites you can have in 100 grams of your frozen broccoli before FDA agents will get all sad at you? Fifty-nine. You can have 59 aphids, thrips and/or mites in every three-and-a-half ounces of your product and be in the clear. Sixty is a problem, but 59? Play on, player!
Some other lines that the FDA will not allow you to cross:
Ground paprika: Average mold count is more than 20 percent; or average of more than 11 rodent hairs per 25 grams; or average of more than 75 insect fragments per 25 grams. (There is a glossary in the handbook that helpfully details "insect fragments" -- to get the equivalent of a "whole insect," all you have to do is count the body portions that have heads.)
Red fish and ocean perch: Three percent of the filets exampled contain one or more copepods accompanied by pus pockets. (Back to the glossary: "Copepods -- Small free-swimming marine crustaceans, many of which are fish parasites. In some species the females enter the tissues of the host fish and may form pus pockets." Yum-O!)
Hops: Average of more than 2,500 aphids per 10 grams (!!!).
Macaroni and noodle products: Average of 225 insect fragments or more per 225 grams.
Mushrooms, canned and dried: Average of 20 or more maggots of any size or average of five maggots 2 millimeters or longer per 100 grams of drained mushrooms and proportionate liquid or 15 grams of dried mushrooms.
Paging Rep. Kucinich! Pitted olives: Average of 1.3 percent or more by count of olives with whole pits and/or pit fragments 2 millimeters or longer.
Popcorn: 20 or more gnawed grains per pound and rodent hair is found in 50 percent or more of the subsamples.
http://www.salon.com/food/francis_la...els/index.html
This is why I think it depends on how much actual damage was done to the tooth. Did it crack? Did it break in some way that constituted serious reconstruction?Quote:
Originally Posted by Winehole23
And, though I'm getting a bit in the weeds, is the damage caused by the olive pit considered "normal"? Ie. would a normal person eating that sandwich, biting into that olive pit, normally cause a good amount of damage? Or was it a relatively freak accident?
I guess we know one of the congressmen who will not vote for tort reform. If he is going to go out and abuse it himself, that is.