Can't you call a spade a spade? You try to say something witty and can't even make a simple statement?
Be someone of meaning. If you say something stand by it.
I'm 43. I never sued anyone yet. I've never really considered suing anyone.
But so soon as I mention that some given set of cir stances might foreseeably cause me to consider it, you call me pathetic.
It also did not escape my notice that you have addressed other posters in this thread with notable vehemence and intensity. Burr in your saddle?
It's quite possible I did not express myself originally (or recall my manner of expression) with the utmost precision. FWIW, I intended neither to deceive nor misdirect..
That said, wasn't this...
...a perfectly good answer?
Last edited by Winehole23; 01-28-2011 at 04:54 AM.
@sickdsm:
Your avatar seems a tad aggro to me. The tough guy thing is more than suggested by your manner of address as well. I didn't pick the description at random or pull it from thin air.
Last edited by Winehole23; 01-28-2011 at 04:56 AM.
This seems to be really important to you.
I can't speak for the others, but if it makes you feel better I can refer to you exclusively as "whiny ."
Would you like that?
At any rate, if the magnitude of the lawsuit is perfunctory at the time of the filing like elbamba suggested, the inference that the damages are excessive or somehow disproportionate to the tort, fails utterly.
Not acting tough, remember?
Fixated on cooler girl, huh? What you been doin?
Did a random reply somehow come from you, like in the joke?
Actually you did speak for the others.
i hadn't noted the delay in the suit, that actually may help his case- perhaps the store refused to acknowledge their responsiblity or lowballed him, and once unable to reach a direct agreement he resorted to a lawsuit as a last option.
Also, while I myself made the distinction that its not the same to have an olive pit in an olive than to have a foreign object or contaminated ingredients, as a food business your reputation is very important and if you sell your sandwich with "pitted olives" on the menu/by the salesperson, you have a responsiblity to respond if it isnt. If someone chokes because they havent cut their meat small enough, its not the same as them injuring themselves because you misrepresented your product, by mistake (like this incident) or intentionally (a baker here once got into a big problem because he served a cake with sugar as a "diabetic" product and nearly killed several children- the cake was taken to the diabetes ward of a pediatric clinic. His defense was that he didnt know it would be taken there, that most of the people that buy those cakes are middle aged women who want to diet- he had to pay quite a bit, but IMO not nearly enough).
In that sense, Kucinich is absolutely right to seek compensation if they have refused to give it voluntarily, but if he is seeking 150.000 for loss of enjoyment he comes off as a prick looking to profit, not someone looking for compensation.
food providers have an obligation to meet standards and offer quality products, but at the same time we can't work in temperature controlled vacuums with no direct manipulation of the products, costs would soar and no one would eat. in the end its just common sense, there is a big difference between an accident (like the olive pitt in the olive) and cost cutting/irresponsible marketing/indifferent hygiene.
This thread gets my vote for "classic political forum thread".
Five pages of this e? I just thought it was a funny story.
Maybe I'm jaded from previous high dollar awards, but $150k doesn't seem like a bad amount to me.
Depending on what was damaged and how, the dental bills could easily run into the $30-40k range (especially since he probably sees an overcharging, over-rated dentist). Getting 2x damages in pain and suffering is reasonable, especially to anyone who's ever had a cracked tooth.
And it doesn't take much, especially if the damage wasn't caught right away. I had a dentist work on an occlusion. Didn't catch that he messed up, and a few years later I started a multi-year program to repair the damage that so far has totaled over $20k (with my dentist giving me about 25% discount). Granted, it got that bad because I wasn't seeing a dentist regularly
Hey Winehole, kudos on the avatar - that's one of my fav movies of all time.
And good work refuting the reactionaries, scofflaws and other self-styled rugged individualists.
Assuming that he was charged such an over inflated price and he is seeking 100k in "pain and suffering" that seems very prima donna-esque to put that high of a price on pain and suffering. When I was six my cousin and I were having an ice fight (throwing ice at each other) I ducked a piece of ice and there was a metal folding chair right below me. Hit my front tooth on it and it exploded, so yes I know how much it hurts. Why can't people just be made whole and be happy (in the case of an accident). There is no need to punish someone for an ACCIDENT. If it was gross negligence or intentional, sure punish the outta them, but damn people are just out to get theirs I guess and that is what is wrong.Maybe I'm jaded from previous high dollar awards, but $150k doesn't seem like a bad amount to me.
Depending on what was damaged and how, the dental bills could easily run into the $30-40k range (especially since he probably sees an overcharging, over-rated dentist). Getting 2x damages in pain and suffering is reasonable, especially to anyone who's ever had a cracked tooth.
And it doesn't take much, especially if the damage wasn't caught right away. I had a dentist work on an occlusion. Didn't catch that he messed up, and a few years later I started a multi-year program to repair the damage that so far has totaled over $20k (with my dentist giving me about 25% discount). Granted, it got that bad because I wasn't seeing a dentist regularly
Not that I disagree with the sentiment, but that's basically just how the system feeds into people's psychies. My point was that given that there is going to be an additional to the actual damages, $150k total is extremely reasonable.
Personally, I think someone should have to prove gross negligence, or intent, before collecting "pain and suffering." This was obviously just a fluke, so dental bills + lost wages + court costs should be fine.
Unfortunately, I've never heard of anyone suing for medical bills without including a "pain and suffering" or punitive damages add-on.
Well, we'll see if they start calling you whiny then, whiny .
Casting disdain on your own thread. Are you ashamed of it now?
Fair enough, but I can only speak for myself
Agreed, as stated above.
That doesn't make sense. 7 years ago I had an accident that along with a broken jaw shattered two upper molars and cracked a bottom molar. Cost around $8k for two bridges and a crown.Depending on what was damaged and how, the dental bills could easily run into the $30-40k range (especially since he probably sees an overcharging, over-rated dentist). Getting 2x damages in pain and suffering is reasonable, especially to anyone who's ever had a cracked tooth.
And it doesn't take much, especially if the damage wasn't caught right away. I had a dentist work on an occlusion. Didn't catch that he messed up, and a few years later I started a multi-year program to repair the damage that so far has totaled over $20k (with my dentist giving me about 25% discount). Granted, it got that bad because I wasn't seeing a dentist regularly
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
