Seriously? Come on! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


jlf1961 -> Seriously? Come on! (1/11/2014 8:19:28 PM)

Lady sues McDonalds because she spilled a hot cup of coffee on her crotch.

She won now we have stupid warning labels.

Now this:

quote:

After brutally beating a man with his Nike Jordan shoes, a pimp filed a $100 million lawsuit against Nike for not providing a warning label that their shoes could be used as a dangerous weapon.

In June, Sirgiorgio Sanford Clardy, 26, or Portland, Ore., repeatedly stomped on the face of a client with his Jordan shoes when the man refused to pay Clardy's prostitute. The man required stitches and plastic surgery after the beating, The Oregonian reports.

The newspaper reports that the jury also found Clardy guilty of robbing the man and beating the 18-year-old woman he forced to work as his prostitute; her injuries were so severe that she bled from her ears.
Source


How about the girl he forced into prostitution and the guy he beat see if horse shoes in athletic socks are harmful to him?




DesideriScuri -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/11/2014 9:38:24 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Lady sues McDonalds because she spilled a hot cup of coffee on her crotch.
She won now we have stupid warning labels.
Now this:
quote:

After brutally beating a man with his Nike Jordan shoes, a pimp filed a $100 million lawsuit against Nike for not providing a warning label that their shoes could be used as a dangerous weapon.
In June, Sirgiorgio Sanford Clardy, 26, or Portland, Ore., repeatedly stomped on the face of a client with his Jordan shoes when the man refused to pay Clardy's prostitute. The man required stitches and plastic surgery after the beating, The Oregonian reports.
The newspaper reports that the jury also found Clardy guilty of robbing the man and beating the 18-year-old woman he forced to work as his prostitute; her injuries were so severe that she bled from her ears.
Source

How about the girl he forced into prostitution and the guy he beat see if horse shoes in athletic socks are harmful to him?


Let me see if I got this straight. Pimp stomps guys face for not paying up. Pimp gets found guilty of the beating and of beating the girl, too. Pimp sues Nike for no warning label. Is his contention that he didn't know stomping on the guy's head with his Jordans was going to do damage and wouldn't have done so had they had a label on them?

Does filing require a lawyer accepting the case? If pimps isn't representing himself, should there be some sort of statute that disbars any lawyer from bringing forth such an asinine suit? If this isn't thrown out right off the bat, how much money is Nike going to have to spend to defend itself?




LookieNoNookie -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/11/2014 10:05:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Lady sues McDonalds because she spilled a hot cup of coffee on her crotch.

She won now we have stupid warning labels.

Now this:

quote:

After brutally beating a man with his Nike Jordan shoes, a pimp filed a $100 million lawsuit against Nike for not providing a warning label that their shoes could be used as a dangerous weapon.

In June, Sirgiorgio Sanford Clardy, 26, or Portland, Ore., repeatedly stomped on the face of a client with his Jordan shoes when the man refused to pay Clardy's prostitute. The man required stitches and plastic surgery after the beating, The Oregonian reports.

The newspaper reports that the jury also found Clardy guilty of robbing the man and beating the 18-year-old woman he forced to work as his prostitute; her injuries were so severe that she bled from her ears.
Source


How about the girl he forced into prostitution and the guy he beat see if horse shoes in athletic socks are harmful to him?


Clearly, 2/3rds of the issues here have shoes factored into the equation.

I think there's a discussion to be had.




FellowSlave -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/11/2014 10:58:24 PM)

It is just a Keynesian stimulus. Think how many jobs the lawsuits support.




MsMJAY -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/12/2014 12:48:25 AM)

Source

He has 20 felony convictions was declared a dangerous offender at his trial last year. He had to be handcuffed in court with a mesh bag over his head during his trial to stop him from spitting on people and they had to put a suicide smock on him because he refused to wear clothing. He went through multiple defense counsels because he threatened and mistreated them so badly that they kept quitting for their own safety so he had to defend himself.

He was sentenced to 100 years and will most likely spend the rest of his life behind bars. Obviously the man just wants more attention......that and the fact that he has repeatedly said that his conviction would get overturned at appeal because he has self declared himself to be mentally ill.

The psychologist found him to be completely sane- just an antisocial psychopath. who scored in the "100th percentile of narcissistic criminals and he’s 100 percent likely to commit violent crimes again in the next seven years." Most serial killers don't score that high.

I would call him an animal except he is really not good enough to be called one. They should stop covering this story or any others concerning him let the jackass die in obscurity.


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Lady sues McDonalds because she spilled a hot cup of coffee on her crotch.

She won now we have stupid warning labels.

Now this:

quote:

After brutally beating a man with his Nike Jordan shoes, a pimp filed a $100 million lawsuit against Nike for not providing a warning label that their shoes could be used as a dangerous weapon.

In June, Sirgiorgio Sanford Clardy, 26, or Portland, Ore., repeatedly stomped on the face of a client with his Jordan shoes when the man refused to pay Clardy's prostitute. The man required stitches and plastic surgery after the beating, The Oregonian reports.

The newspaper reports that the jury also found Clardy guilty of robbing the man and beating the 18-year-old woman he forced to work as his prostitute; her injuries were so severe that she bled from her ears.
Source


How about the girl he forced into prostitution and the guy he beat see if horse shoes in athletic socks are harmful to him?





JstAnotherSub -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/12/2014 4:11:27 AM)

https://www.caoc.org/index.cfm?pg=facts

It was more than a spilled cup of coffee. Please know the facts on that one, she was seriously injured.

As for the Nike suit, ::::eyeroll:::




AthenaSurrenders -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/12/2014 4:38:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub

https://www.caoc.org/index.cfm?pg=facts

It was more than a spilled cup of coffee. Please know the facts on that one, she was seriously injured.

As for the Nike suit, ::::eyeroll:::

Thanks, I was just going to make this comment.

Whether you agree with the coffee ruling or not, it is a really misunderstood case in which an elderly woman was seriously injured despite hundreds of previous complaints.
It is certainly not fair to compare her to a criminal trying to profit from kicking people in the head and blaming the shoes.




jlf1961 -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/12/2014 5:50:24 AM)

I think we are talking two different McDonald's cases.

I know that the elderly woman was completely justified in her suit.

Shortly after that case hit the news, another woman filed suit based on coffee burns, however, the case never went to court. She was claiming that the burns she received prevented her from working.

I will try to find a link to the story, but I remember it from Paul Harvey.




HipPoindexter -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/12/2014 6:03:23 AM)

Thanks.

Also, Pro Tip: "The Twinkie Defense" doesn't mean what everyone (including Dick Wolf) seems to think/pretend they think it means.
quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY

Source

He has 20 felony convictions was declared a dangerous offender at his trial last year. He had to be handcuffed in court with a mesh bag over his head during his trial to stop him from spitting on people and they had to put a suicide smock on him because he refused to wear clothing. He went through multiple defense counsels because he threatened and mistreated them so badly that they kept quitting for their own safety so he had to defend himself.

He was sentenced to 100 years and will most likely spend the rest of his life behind bars. Obviously the man just wants more attention......that and the fact that he has repeatedly said that his conviction would get overturned at appeal because he has self declared himself to be mentally ill.

The psychologist found him to be completely sane- just an antisocial psychopath. who scored in the "100th percentile of narcissistic criminals and he’s 100 percent likely to commit violent crimes again in the next seven years." Most serial killers don't score that high.

I would call him an animal except he is really not good enough to be called one. They should stop covering this story or any others concerning him let the jackass die in obscurity.


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Lady sues McDonalds because she spilled a hot cup of coffee on her crotch.

She won now we have stupid warning labels.

Now this:

quote:

After brutally beating a man with his Nike Jordan shoes, a pimp filed a $100 million lawsuit against Nike for not providing a warning label that their shoes could be used as a dangerous weapon.

In June, Sirgiorgio Sanford Clardy, 26, or Portland, Ore., repeatedly stomped on the face of a client with his Jordan shoes when the man refused to pay Clardy's prostitute. The man required stitches and plastic surgery after the beating, The Oregonian reports.

The newspaper reports that the jury also found Clardy guilty of robbing the man and beating the 18-year-old woman he forced to work as his prostitute; her injuries were so severe that she bled from her ears.
Source


How about the girl he forced into prostitution and the guy he beat see if horse shoes in athletic socks are harmful to him?







MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/12/2014 6:23:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub

https://www.caoc.org/index.cfm?pg=facts

It was more than a spilled cup of coffee. Please know the facts on that one, she was seriously injured.




Even IF this site is accurate, the suit is still completely frivolous. Taking the lid off of hot coffee while the cup is between your legs is completely negligent behavior. In my musician days, I used to get McDonald's coffee before rehearsal every night (4 nights a week). I had a stick shift car, with no cup holders, and I would put the cup between my legs. My left foot/leg would be constantly clutching to shift. I would always spill some, and burn my thigh or other parts. One time, the lid came off and spilled half the cup on me. I was burned.

My point is, I was young and stupid and just dealt with being burnt. She is an elderly lady and should know better. She is just elderly and stupid.


It would have never occurred to me in a million years to sue anyone for my own stupidity.






EdBowie -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/12/2014 6:39:43 AM)

She wasn't driving, she was a passenger. She didn't spill anything, the cup collapsed when opened to add sugar, because of McD's deliberate policy of making the coffee too hot, which weakened the sides of the cup. She didn't sue McD's for millions, she asked for something like 25K to cover the skin grafts on her legs.

McDonalds knew from a string of complaints that this was going to happen, and refused to lower the coffee temp back down to industry standards, leaving memos that showed a careless attitude toward scalded customers..

No amount of ad hominem shilling for McD's that she was 'elderly and stupid' is going to change the facts. Neither her age, race, income, nor IQ have anything to do with their misconduct.


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub

https://www.caoc.org/index.cfm?pg=facts

It was more than a spilled cup of coffee. Please know the facts on that one, she was seriously injured.




Even IF this site is accurate, the suit is still completely frivolous. Taking the lid off of hot coffee while the cup is between your legs is completely negligent behavior. In my musician days, I used to get McDonald's coffee before rehearsal every night (4 nights a week). I had a stick shift car, with no cup holders, and I would put the cup between my legs. My left foot/leg would be constantly clutching to shift. I would always spill some, and burn my thigh or other parts. One time, the lid came off and spilled half the cup on me. I was burned.

My point is, I was young and stupid and just dealt with being burnt. She is an elderly lady and should know better. She is just elderly and stupid.


It would have never occurred to me in a million years to sue anyone for my own stupidity.








MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/12/2014 6:48:40 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: EdBowie

She wasn't driving, she was a passenger. She didn't spill anything, the cup collapsed when opened to add sugar, because of McD's deliberate policy of making the coffee too hot, which weakened the sides of the cup. She didn't sue McD's for millions, she asked for something like 25K to cover the skin grafts on her legs.

McDonalds knew from a string of complaints that this was going to happen, and refused to lower the coffee temp back down to industry standards, leaving memos that showed a careless attitude toward scalded customers..

No amount of ad hominem shilling for McD's that she was 'elderly and stupid' is going to change the facts. Neither her age, race, income, nor IQ have anything to do with their misconduct.





Whether she was driving or not is irrelevant. She took a lid off a cup of hot coffee that was between her legs. (Negligent, and I would say "stupid" behavior.)

She should have known better.

Period.




RottenJohnny -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/12/2014 6:54:15 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
If this isn't thrown out right off the bat, how much money is Nike going to have to spend to defend itself?

[:D]
Whatever the amount is, I'm pretty sure they can outspend a pimp.




Moonhead -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/12/2014 6:58:29 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01
It would have never occurred to me in a million years to sue anyone for my own stupidity.

Are you sure you're an American?
[;)]
Frivolous lawsuits are an authentioc form of American folk art these days...




DomKen -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/12/2014 6:59:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Lady sues McDonalds because she spilled a hot cup of coffee on her crotch.

She won now we have stupid warning labels.

Now this:

quote:

After brutally beating a man with his Nike Jordan shoes, a pimp filed a $100 million lawsuit against Nike for not providing a warning label that their shoes could be used as a dangerous weapon.

In June, Sirgiorgio Sanford Clardy, 26, or Portland, Ore., repeatedly stomped on the face of a client with his Jordan shoes when the man refused to pay Clardy's prostitute. The man required stitches and plastic surgery after the beating, The Oregonian reports.

The newspaper reports that the jury also found Clardy guilty of robbing the man and beating the 18-year-old woman he forced to work as his prostitute; her injuries were so severe that she bled from her ears.
Source


How about the girl he forced into prostitution and the guy he beat see if horse shoes in athletic socks are harmful to him?

The guy is locked up. In some places, where this isn't illegal, some prisoners sue anyone/thing they can dream up a grievance against. They get to be transported from the prison to a lockup near the civil court which is, I guess, sort of a vacation for those inmates.




EdBowie -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/12/2014 7:23:58 AM)

When people open a bottle of orange juice, they don't strain it for broken glass because they assume that the manufacturer has taken care of such things. What McD's did was no different than deciding to sell x% of their orange juice with glass in it because it was cheaper than buying new bottling equipment.

Likewise there is nothing stupid about taking the lid off a cup of coffee to add sugar, when the cup has been designed to withstand that sort of handling, and the coffee inside is sold at a safe temperature. Millions of people have done it safely without the 3rd degree scalding results that McDs created.


When McDonalds knowingly jacked up the temperature and stayed with the collapsing cups as part of a profit margin equation, they took all the blame upon themselves. They could have settled for a pittance but the let the arrogance of power cost them millions.


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: EdBowie

She wasn't driving, she was a passenger. She didn't spill anything, the cup collapsed when opened to add sugar, because of McD's deliberate policy of making the coffee too hot, which weakened the sides of the cup. She didn't sue McD's for millions, she asked for something like 25K to cover the skin grafts on her legs.

McDonalds knew from a string of complaints that this was going to happen, and refused to lower the coffee temp back down to industry standards, leaving memos that showed a careless attitude toward scalded customers..

No amount of ad hominem shilling for McD's that she was 'elderly and stupid' is going to change the facts. Neither her age, race, income, nor IQ have anything to do with their misconduct.





Whether she was driving or not is irrelevant. She took a lid off a cup of hot coffee that was between her legs. (Negligent, and I would say "stupid" behavior.)

She should have known better.

Period.





DesideriScuri -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/12/2014 7:28:19 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
If this isn't thrown out right off the bat, how much money is Nike going to have to spend to defend itself?

[:D]
Whatever the amount is, I'm pretty sure they can outspend a pimp.


Yes, they can outspend a pimp, but, should they have to?

Imagine if every Tom, Dick, or Harry that had any problem with a shoe sued the shoe company. Of course the shoe company could outspend any one of them, but if there are enough of them, that amount could impact the company quite heavily.

IMO, there needs to be a "frivolous lawsuit" consequence for lawyers.




graceadieu -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/12/2014 7:58:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01
Even IF this site is accurate, the suit is still completely frivolous. Taking the lid off of hot coffee while the cup is between your legs is completely negligent behavior. In my musician days, I used to get McDonald's coffee before rehearsal every night (4 nights a week). I had a stick shift car, with no cup holders, and I would put the cup between my legs. My left foot/leg would be constantly clutching to shift. I would always spill some, and burn my thigh or other parts. One time, the lid came off and spilled half the cup on me. I was burned.


Did you need skin grafts over 10% of your body because of your burns? If so, that's admirable dedication to "dealing with it".




MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/12/2014 8:00:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: EdBowie

When people open a bottle of orange juice, they don't strain it for broken glass because they assume that the manufacturer has taken care of such things. What McD's did was no different than deciding to sell x% of their orange juice with glass in it because it was cheaper than buying new bottling equipment.

Likewise there is nothing stupid about taking the lid off a cup of coffee to add sugar, when the cup has been designed to withstand that sort of handling, and the coffee inside is sold at a safe temperature. Millions of people have done it safely without the 3rd degree scalding results that McDs created.




Your orange juice analogy is seriously flawed. Coffee is hot regardless of from whom it is purchased. There is an expectation that it is hot. (Hot enough to burn). Putting a hot liquid between your legs and taking off the lid is stupid.


There is no expectation that orange juice has broken glass in it.


McDonald's sold hot coffee. (Probably too hot for many). It does not excuse this negligent behavior.


McDonald's should make less hot coffee (which they have done). She should learn not to put ANY hot liquid between her legs (something she should have learned much earlier in her life), admit her mistake, and move on (sans suing others).





MariaB -> RE: Seriously? Come on! (1/12/2014 8:43:01 AM)

I'm very glad I don't live in a suing society. The more you successfully sue, the more of a nanny state you become. In this particular instance though, I think McDonald had a lot to answer for, 3rd degree burns are pretty serious stuff.

When my son was 7 years old he went to a birthday party at McDonald. I got a phone call about an hour in asking if I could come and take my son home as their had been an incident. My son didn't want a fizzy drink with his meal but had asked instead for a hot chocolate. The waitress had brought it over along with a straw. It was red hot and as my child sucked on the straw he burnt his mouth.

I had to take him to A&E where he was treated for minor burns to the tongue and throat. I approached McDonald about the incident and they told me the waitress had been reprimanded and this sort of thing would never happen again. They compensated my son with half a dozen kids meals to eat at his convenience. That was enough for me. Perhaps if I had been an American I would of filed a law suit against them and we would be rich now!!







Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875