Suing People

Mike-O

Mike-O

Active member


Suing someone, or something, is a national pastime to a certain large group of visitors that this Canadian website sees every single day. Jokes are made about it, people rage, people defend actions or dismiss them completely. In the end, we're looking at suing through a very slanted lens - mostly the more notorious cases are highlighted, be they for better or worse. At least on the skiing side of things, lawsuits are seen as horrific and the reason we can't have nice things. It's not a strictly one-sided cultural phenomenon, as it is spreading all around the globe in both serious and dubious instances.

So I ask you, denizens of NS, have you, would you, will you or do you know someone who has sued someone for anything, but mostly in this case for monetary compensation? Be it a real case, a falsified claim, a strike for "opportunity" or something else?

 
just for about 5000 to cover my brothers medical expenses and lost tuition when he got sucker punched. we also had him kicked out of uni or else we threatened to take action against the school. they had a file on this kid a half inch thick. he once went home with a girl and when things didn't turn out the way he hoped he wrapped himself in her blankets and pissed in her bed. dude had it coming. don't regret it one bit.
 
And this is why I hate the American legal system.

I don't understand how a burglar can break into a house and as he's leaving, trip and fall on the walkway, get injured, sue the family he tried to rob, and win. That's unacceptable to my standards.

Suing has become something people do whenever they get the chance. It's sad. They can shut down businesses and ruin people's lives because they are greedy little fucks.

It is my belief that suing should have much stricter guidelines to who can sue who for what reason.

I would have slapped that McDonalds bitch in the face for even suggesting suing for her being a dumbass, of course she would probably sue me for that too.
 
99% of the time no, i wouldn't sue someone unless it was something like they abused my rights or exploited my work.. it's ridiculous how ofter the system is abused for the sake of abusing it and for a loss of morality. I heard about a case recently where a woman bought a lotto ticket, looked at the numbers, decided it was worthless and gave it to the cashier. Turns out the ticket was worth $1million. The purchaser sued and won $800,000. The fact that there were grounds to sue is fucked up to me. get the fuck over it, you're a dumbass.
 
If the justice system allows a robber to win in court for getting hurt trying to rob shit then it fails. Maybe if we just solved everything with violence then people would be less inclined to fuck around.
 
I'm 100% with you. I remember there was another burglar suing the victim case in Conneticut I think? And he fell through the skylight on the roof of these people house and broke his ankle and was arrested for breaking and entering, charged then filed suit from jail against the home owners and won. I'll try to find the link. Long story short being able to sue is essential and good. But frivolous cases especially in healthcare need to be reigned in
 
So a lot of people here are against taking advantage of the system, but where can you draw the line? Much like good men who get into politics with a clean conscience but may end up tainted at the top at some point, in some leagues it's almost a natural progression.

What if today, something similar to the infamous McDonald's case happened to you and the opportunity would be right there - a golden ticket for at least a huge sum on a out-of-court settlement and a possibility for many years of financial security for yourself and your family? Would you stick with your views and principles and not even think about it, or opt to give it a shot, no matter how you have despised those who have played the game before?
 
an aunt of mine recently moved back to england from america where she'd been for 20 odd years.

She was having the family round for a housewarming type thing and had gone out and bought a load of food locally for it. She'd been to this particular wholefood shop in town (small rural community) and got some brie or something, and when she'd cut a piece and brought it up to her face before being stopped by her (american) husband, they found the cheese was mostly maggots.

Basically she was kicking up a huge fuss about how she was going to sue the shop and all that, the rest of the family had to explain to her that thats not how things work over here. She went back to the shop and the shopkeeper said "sorry, sometimes we get flies in the shop, can't be helped. would you like a new piece?"

TL;DR rotten cheese, wants to sue, gets told to sit down.

now that i read back through that it seems like a really pointless story. but i've typed it out now so fuck it.
 
There's something called due diligence(I know this is Australian law, I would assume American as well) basically says that in owning something you have a legal responsibility to maintain it to the point that it's safe.

So if a company owns a sidewalk and leaves it slippery, and someone falls on it, it is due to their negligence.

There was a story I learned about in my 1 law class about a woman who left the bar, had to pee on the way home and broke into a garage and used a toilet. The cistern was broken and she knocked it on to her own head, knocking her out. She then sued for negligence.

Although it gets taken over the line, it puts a liability on people to take care of their stuff. Makes it so there's a consequence to their negligence.
 
This story is wrong in so many levels. She breaks and enters into someone's property and somehow, against all comprehensible logic, manages to drop the cistern plate on her head (!?) and she sues for negligence?

That cheese story I thought was pretty relevant, as your aunt had become accustomed to the suing mentality.
 
My uncle fell through an unmarked slightly covered shaft in a work place 2 stories to flat. His feet literally exploded. He sued and I don't blame him they gave him an unsafe place to work. Fuck people who go sue happy fucks it for everyone.
 
When I was twelve someone threw a gravelstone in my eye. This has left me with permanently impaired vision in my left eye.
 
When I was twelve someone threw a gravelstone in my eye. This has left me with permanently impaired vision in my left eye. I see almost nothing, glasses
 
When I was twelve someone threw a gravelstone in my eye. This has left me with permanently impaired vision in my left eye. I see almost nothing, glasses and lenses wouldn't help because my cornea is basically like the Rocky Mountains. Under Dutch law I'm suing his insurance, despite the fact that I have to live with this for the rest of my life I'm only looking to get a couple of thousand euros. People who receive millions for buying a maggot invested burger are incredibly sad. And mobile NS is shit.
 
That lady had her vagina perminantly disfigured by scalding hot coffee. The lawsuit was about the temperature of the coffee, no the warning. If I spilled some McD's on my junk and it melted off, you can bet my missing penis I'd sue.
 
it was being served at a temp hot enough to cause 3rd degree burns and require skin grafting. i know they updated their requirments after the trial, but I don't recall the exact numbers.
 
Yay another Mike-O "Fuck America" thread!

I'm going to sue Mike-O just because I'm american and therefore an uber sketchy piece of shit. You just wait until I get out of this obamaphone line and get my structured settlement JG Wentworth'd. You're all fucked.
 
All those people just pursuing the American dream, get rich quick with minimal effort while disregarding everyone else on your way there.
 
Well, I don't agree with everything Mike-O says, but I'm 100% with him on this one, how come a burglar can sue the homeowner and win.. That's seriously fucked up.

There are a lot of great things about America, but the suing mentality isn't one of those in my opinion.
 
So there's this old lady who lives in my neighborhood and when it snows she has trouble shoveling her driveway. So this guy who lives across the street and has a plow on his truck always plows it for her, well at the end of winter last year there was a decent sized pile of snow at the end of her driveway from him plowing it. Once it melted she discovered that the grass that had been under it was dead and threatened to sue this nice guy who was just trying to help someone. Sorry about grammar and spelling I'm on mobile
 
Agreed, along with 99.9% of the rest of America that sue happy motherfuckers should be awarded a trip through a wood chipper. I've been in dozens of situations where I could have- and maybe should have- sued but never did. It's against my belefs, simple as that- along with the VAST majority of Americans to put it extremely lightly. To use the most bullshit examples out there to try to paint America as a veritable playground of lawsuits is evidence that one may indeed have ingested antifreeze as a child, been huffing magic markers for a bit too long or they're just some butthurt asshole with an undeserved bone to pick with a country they've never been to.

What the fuck is the point? I'm getting at the need for Mike-O to put the little 'Murica jab in his OP. It's just so his style and I think it's hilarious. How about the Canadian govt suing people and companies automotically regardless of fault in an attepmt to recoup costs for their healthcare in serious injury cases? No comment on that? Of coure not. Why would you? This is a thread about America and how it's full of pieces of shit who should all just die to make the world a better place. Duh. How about fucking Russia you asshats? It's customary for EVERYONE to drive around with a dash cams because traffic set-ups and accident lawsuits are so unbelievably common- BUT NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. America is the worst. Yup. Have to be. Mike-O said so. I think I just pulled a fucking muscle in my eye I just rolled them so hard. Do you guys EVER bother looking into a topic or do you just regurgitate whatever knee-jerk the last retard who spewed an illegitimate pov used?

If you want to talk about the act of suing, do it across the board. Not just in the context of how you percieve things in to be in America because you hate it- it cheapens your argument when you pidgeonhole it into a one-dimensional topic like that, especially when you use the stereotypical cases like the burgular and the hot coffee as the foundation of your argumenative position. That's like saying "Hitler sucks, so Germans are obviously fucking pieces of shit, fuck Germany" Seriously, get a real educated opinion and I'll respect it more. This is barely a thread about suing, and a weak cover for Mike-O to spread his anti-American propaganda some more. I think it's pretty funny actually, but whatever. Fucking sue me.
 
Yes, there is a lot more to that case than most people realize. Primarily that McDonalds was serving coffee with a temperature of 185-190 degrees F - most coffee that you get at any other coffee shop is served at 140 deg f. which is still hot as fuck. As much as I hate frivolous lawsuits, McDick's was definitely negligent here....
 
suing is the american passtime, but you need to remember the other side too

there's so many laws in canada that prevent common sense from being used in the courtroom, that often valid points in court cases get overturned because of some BS technicality

For example, the victoria stafford murder/rape trial recently happened in London, Ontario. When police were conducting the investigation on the accused murderer, they obtained a warrant to search his car, and proceeded to do so. The man had left his laptop in the car, which contained thousands of very disturbing images of children. In the trial, this evidence was excluded from submission because the police had failed to obtain a search warrant for the very laptop which that man left sitting in his car, even though they had a warrant to search the car. The guy was convicted still, but regardless it's completely illogical

Laws to prevent abuse of the system are great, but when they impede on the ability to use common sense in the courtroom that's where more problems start
 
I almost sued my former roommate. Halfway through our lease, he just bailed. (Said he was visiting his parents, and just never came back. Even left everything he had). In order to not get evicted, I had to pay his portion of the rent. In Vail, rent isn't cheep, so my total rent went up to $1600+/mo. I talked to the local courts, and they said it would take months and months to get it into the process, and it was only 50/50 that I would ever see the money again. I ended up moving out of state right after the lease was up, and will never see that money.
 
1). You're full of shit

2). You're too bitch to even say it so you hide your agenda behind bullshit stereotypes.

That is all. Enjoy your pedantic rants and misguided cheap shots. Let's be honest though- If you were actually concerned with the progression of our increasingly litigious global society, you'd be discussing its explosion in Russia, not its recession in America and on that note I bid you auf weidersehen, herr O.
 
Although a lot of his threads are "anti-american" this one I feel is legitimate. He is asking for peoples opinions on suing and whether they would if they ever got the chance. Just so happens that many stupid example of suing are from 'merica.

Unless it was completely somebody else's fault and I had serious injury preventing me from going about daily activities I would never sue.
 
I have no agenda. I had a question for people here about lawsuits which you seemed to dismiss in your retorts.

Now look at it this way - I make a thread about Finland, Russia, Greece, Spain... anything goes, be it positive or negative, and most replies are "Meanwhile in _____" or "lol no 1 carez". I make a thread about a matter that mostly concerns the US when it comes to frivolous cases in which unquantifiably large sums are often asked for compensation, and I hate the US and am a giant fucking chode.

Russia has always been wild, have you been? It's wild. It's a massive society that constantly struggles between hierarchy, bureaucracy, free markets and rampant crime and poverty. You think Finnish people as a whole haven't been a bit ticked off, concerned or critical of our neighbouring nation a few times in the last few decades? We all know what's going on in Russia, and their basic structure only allows one to be from the outside looking in - even nationals are powerless under Putin's iron fist these days. Dashcams to ensure you're in the right, fuck, that should be mandatory or at least recommended in every nation of the world with vehicles. Gnartron posts about Russia all the time, look at how lively the discussion is there... not very.

I made this thread mostly because I read about the probable lawsuit going on in Aspen with Wiener Wednesdays, it prompted me to once again ask both "What the fuck" and "Why is this happening, would you do it"?

 
This for example. No, it's not illogical. If you obtain a search warrant you are effectively obtaining a legal exception to someone's constitutional rights. Consequently we take that pretty seriously, and the parameters of the search warrant (i.e. what you get to look at) must be clearly established so as to minimally impair the rights of the person who's getting searched. I.e., if someone gets a warrant to search your house for a drug lab, they do not have a right to read your personal mail that is sitting on the counter.

Not to mention, the guy's on for murder, what do disturbing images of children have to do with whether or not he killed someone? Unless they're OF the person he's accused of killing that probably isn't even a technicality. I don't know the circumstances of this incident, but wherever you have a piece of evidence, if its prejudicial effect outweighs its probative value, it MUST be excluded on basic principles. What that means is, if I am introducing evidence which is less about shedding light on the facts of a particular situation and more about casting a particular individual (i.e. the defendant) in a negative light in the hopes that the jury will have a lower opinion of him and this might lead to them convicting him (i.e. dude accused of murder exposed as being a kiddie toucher), it has to be excluded. Otherwise you get bias.

Seriously so many people like being armchair lawyers. I am not a criminal lawyer or a litigator, so I don't really know that much about those areas, and consequently I don't really pass judgment on any particular situation without knowing the specific details. If a technical rule of procedure leads to someone getting away with something, maybe, just maybe, there's some really well founded policy reason why that technical rule of procedure exists.

Anyway this thread is about suing people. Allow me to point to the one difference between the USA and most of the rest of the western world: In the USA, if you lose, you are not exposed to costs. If you sue someone in Canada and lose, you not only have to pay your own legal fees, but at least some portion of the other side's, which is a huge disincentive to suing someone unless you're confident you have a winnable case. If this rule isn't in place, people can threaten lawsuits and a cost-benefit analysis from the other side says "we'd need to pay a lawyer 50,000 bucks to defend this, so let's instead just pay 30,000 to make it go away". Want to reduce the problem by a massive margin? Loser pays winner's costs.
 
this is very logical and well thought out, but you forget, you are arguing with ns. wish you luck
 
im not sure how you define "good lawyer", but my dad would never do that, and he has been practicing law for over 20 years
 
That's how it works here as well, loser pays. Not in class-action suits though, but not many of those around with all the sheeple forming lines. I think it's a very good disincentive, but our justice system is fucked on other levels so it all balances out.
 
Are you sure it's fucked or do you just not understand it? I am convinced at this point that half of the bitching people do about politics or the justice system is essentially,

"I have taken this view based on a superficial analysis of the situation. This superficial analysis yielded a conclusion I do not like. Actually learning about the area and looking at things in a nuanced fashion would take time and effort. Rabble rabble rabble!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top