anyone notice, it was a coach for the cowboys? I’m sure he’s not hurting for money. Hopefully if he wins, then he’ll donate it, but that’s doubtful
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
anyone notice, it was a coach for the cowboys? I’m sure he’s not hurting for money. Hopefully if he wins, then he’ll donate it, but that’s doubtful[/quote]
I’m sorry, have you actually known someone who didn’t want more money?
Rich people lie and steal too. I know, I was amazed to learn this as well.
I was just asking for the sake of asking. I really don’t care about the shock value of it-shit happens. All I was saying is that I’d sue the fuck out of them just for the sake of getting a lot of money out of the deal. And yes, I agree that if you can’t see a rat sitting in your salad you have problems.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
jacross wrote:
Well if the trauma was to the extent that she had difficulty eating salads (formed by essential vebetables required for health) then that would extend the damage under negligence.
You ask for 1.7mill because asking for $20 means you will get $5.
Who gives a shit? Does anyone deserve anything over a replacement of their food and possibly several free coupons for something like this?
These same types of people are the reason insurance rates are so high for physicians that many are leaving the profession. How does anyone justify suing for that much money over something like this?
If that’s the case, everytime my order gets screwed up, I should get a few hundred bucks for pain and suffering.[/quote]
It’s more a fault of the legal system than the people suing. If there’s a million bucks up for grabs, someone’s going to take them up on the offer. All it takes is a few frivolous lawsuits (like the hot coffee one) to get by to put a HUGE incentive on wasting everyone’s time and money.
[quote]cap’nsalty wrote:
Professor X wrote:
jacross wrote:
Well if the trauma was to the extent that she had difficulty eating salads (formed by essential vebetables required for health) then that would extend the damage under negligence.
You ask for 1.7mill because asking for $20 means you will get $5.
Who gives a shit? Does anyone deserve anything over a replacement of their food and possibly several free coupons for something like this?
These same types of people are the reason insurance rates are so high for physicians that many are leaving the profession. How does anyone justify suing for that much money over something like this?
If that’s the case, everytime my order gets screwed up, I should get a few hundred bucks for pain and suffering.
It’s more a fault of the legal system than the people suing. If there’s a million bucks up for grabs, someone’s going to take them up on the offer. All it takes is a few frivolous lawsuits (like the hot coffee one) to get by to put a HUGE incentive on wasting everyone’s time and money.[/quote]
I agree. Don’t get me wrong Prof I was not attempting to make a broad defence of the common law precedents set down in the US (and to a lesser extent Aus) courts.
You would think the assistant coach for the Dallas Cowboys has enough money in his pocket that he doesn’t need to get richer off a lawsuit like this. sigh
For what it is worth, I review health code violations for restaurants in my area from time to time. The Mcdonalds in my area has the fewest violations I have come across. They even beat expensive places like Mortons, or Mikes American Grill.
I guess being a former restaurant cook makes me inquisitive about restaurant cleanliness.
Also Professor is right, once the lawsuit is created the damage is done. Most people do not even know the Wendy’s finger in the chili incident was a hoax:
You can eat Rats-A-Roni at home, so why go out? Another reason not to eat fast food. Like we needed one.
A better question would be why does the United States allow McDonalds to serve food 7 times higher in fat content than in other countries?
[quote]MrCritical wrote:
You can eat Rats-A-Roni at home, so why go out? Another reason not to eat fast food. Like we needed one.
A better question would be why does the United States allow McDonalds to serve food 7 times higher in fat content than in other countries?[/quote]
Because we operate on the radical assumption that people can make their own decisions, and don’t need a nanny government to make sure they eat all their fruits and vegetables. Crazy, I know.
[quote]cap’nsalty wrote:
MrCritical wrote:
You can eat Rats-A-Roni at home, so why go out? Another reason not to eat fast food. Like we needed one.
A better question would be why does the United States allow McDonalds to serve food 7 times higher in fat content than in other countries?
Because we operate on the radical assumption that people can make their own decisions, and don’t need a nanny government to make sure they eat all their fruits and vegetables. Crazy, I know.[/quote]
For real. If I want a pizza, I would like to have the freedom to buy one. Why would we need food regulation to that degree? What next…censorship of the Superbowl restricting floppy titties during halftime?
Wait.