Anything for a buck these days...

Humiliated frat boys sue 'Borat'

Two fraternity boys want to make lawsuit against "Borat" over their drunken appearance in the hit movie.

The legal action filed Thursday on their behalf claims they were duped into appearing in the spoof documentary "Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan," in which they made racist and sexist comments on camera.

The young men "engaged in behavior that they otherwise would not have engaged in," the lawsuit says.

"Borat" follows the adventures of comedian Sacha Baron Cohen's Kazakh journalist character in a blend of fiction and improvised comic encounters as he travels across the United States and mocks Americans.

The plaintiffs were not named in the lawsuit "to protect themselves from any additional and unnecessary embarrassment." They were identified in the movie as fraternity members from a South Carolina university, and appeared drunk as they made insulting comments about women and minorities to Cohen's character.

The lawsuit claims that in October 2005, a production crew took the students to a bar to drink and "loosen up" before participating in what they were told would be a documentary to be shown outside of the United States.

"They were induced to agree to participate and were told the name of the fraternity and the name of their school wouldn't be used," said the plaintiffs' attorney, Olivier Taillieu. "They were put into an RV and were made to believe they were picking up Borat the hitchhiker."

After a bout of heavy drinking, the plaintiffs signed a release form they were told "had something to do with reliability issues with being in the RV," Taillieu said.

The film "made plaintiffs the object of ridicule, humiliation, mental anguish and emotional and physical distress, loss of reputation, goodwill and standing in the community," the lawsuit said.

It names 20th Century Fox, a unit of News Corp., and three production companies as defendants.

Studio spokesman Gregg Brilliant said the lawsuit "has no merit."

The plaintiffs were seeking an injunction to stop the studio from displaying their image and likeness, along with unspecified monetary damages.

"Borat" debuted as the top movie last weekend with $26.5 million.

umm...they would otherwise not have engaged in stupid nasty behavior if they knew someone (other than a Kazikstani hitchhiker) might find out? Stupid is as stupid does, but I am not sure that is a valid defense under SC law.

Just because you can find some lawyer to file suit on your behalf doesn't mean you have a meritorious cause of action! :rolleyes:

I can't wait to see this movie!

seems to me this is the one sure fire way to make SURE their antics are seen by an even wider audience than has already! i cant wait for channel 18 to show it

Alcohol....a beautiful thing. Loosens up the old tongue and let's your TRUE self out. I read this on CNN this morning and laffed hard.

It's a clever marketing ploy by 20th Century Fox

saw the movie a couple days ago...
Has some funny things but would not see it for a 2nd time, unless you like hairy man asses...

Geez.....us Here we go again. Frivolous lawsuits abound in the U.S. and suing because you were being drunk and stupid is pretty much stupid within itself!

Not that this is such a case, but lots of suits people are quick to label "frivolous" aren't.

dc - yep. people here do not want to take responsibilty for their actions.

hey world - cohen has been doing borat for years on his 'ali g' show. where has everyone been?

doesn't this suit sound just like 'girls gone wild - spring break'?????

I'm sure there are a bunch out there that need to be addressed in some way, but the ones that the media bring to the public's attention that are way beyond being "reasonable" are the ones that I want to go and shake the person that is suing. What ever reason, they want easy money.
Lets see, the "hot coffee/McDondald" incident, where the person was awarded a "stupid" amount of money. Come on now. Unless you're drinking an "iced" coffee, coffee is hot...I don't think anyone should be awarded for being a dumb a**s and that is what a lot of our courts are doing. It goes back to being responsible for our OWN actions. I know that there are lawsuits where there has been product liability in which someone was hurt. Yes, make the manufactures pay, but just becasue I walk outside and trip over a bike, I'm not going to go and sue the bike shop because it wasn't labeled properly or painted bright enough for me to see.
Like I have stated before I worked at my cousin's law firm for a while. When the frivolous lawsuits started coming in ad-nausium I figured I'd better get out of there before I killed someone. And that would not have been frivolous, it would have been justifiable!

Much better hangin' with cows than lyars anyday!

Well, the McDonald's suit is a perfect example of a suit I think needed to be brought. The problem with limiting yourself to the media account is that you rarely get all the facts.
McDonalds was on notice that they kept their coffee at a temperature several degrees higher than the industry norm considered safe. They knew there had been at least three documented incidents of serious burn injuries attributable to the temperature. They determined it would be too expensive to retrofit all their coffee machines so decided it was worth it to continue to risk physical injury to their customers in order to protect thier profits.

The elderly woman who sued suffered serious burns which required a lengthy hospital stay and numerous skin grafts. Early on she offered to settle with McDonalds for the cost of her medical bills. McDonalds refused.
In determining an appropriate award, the jury took into consideration the woman's portion of negligence and adjusted their damage verdict accordingly. The prevailing legal principal is who is in the best position to prevent the injury. Certainly the plaintiff bore some responsibility, but no one expects to suffer burns requiring skin grafts from a cup of coffee. McDonalds was on notice this was a possibility, took no steps to prevent such injuries and provided no warnings.
The jury then imposed punitive damages against McDonalds for their intentional conduct. It was the punitive damages which made up the bulk of the verdict. The common argument is that punitive damages must be significant enough to discourage future similar behavior. All in all, I think it was a very just verdict. McDonalds promptly retrofited their coffee machines. They failed to do so until it hurt their pocketbook.

Jesse, no one's asking you to stick around. Feel free to take a hike. You could use the exercise.
(this won't last long.)

Cows got sumpin' to hang on to! hehehe!

Very interesting L (the lawsuit)

Geez, I gotta type faster and quit getting distracted

it was a funny movie, but i thought it could have been better.

Lawcucui....That reminded me.

I HATE LAWYERS!

Gues you're having a bad day in court...lol

I had a cup of MacD's coffee in Chicago Midway last month that I had to let set for 45 minutes before I could drink it. I am amazed that that stupid cup could keep it that hot that long. I was amazed that it was so hot to start with. I was angry because I only got 2 sips after all that time and they wouldn't let me bring it on the plane.
Many years ago I remember a product liability suit and the outcome was on the news. The plaintiff sued becasue he injured himself trimming a hedge with his rotary lawn mower. Apparently there was no "warning label". The plaintiff won some big bucks, and the news showed him and his relatives walking out of the courtroom with big smiles. Basically, wearing their stupidity like a badge of honor. What idiot doesn't know you can't hold your stupid lawn mower at chest height and trim a hedge?
Generic label. "You must be this bright to use our product."
Don't talk bad about college students, they are our best and brightest (they keep reminding us).

"The film 'made plaintiffs the object of ridicule, humiliation, mental anguish and emotional and physical distress, loss of reputation, goodwill and standing in the community,' the lawsuit said."


Sounds to me more like it should read:
...."the plaintiffs made themselves the object of ridicule...."

How about that guy that bought a new RV and he was driving down the hwy....He walked to the back of the RV to get something and ofcourse the RV crashed...He went after the right parties and won a major lawsuit, nothing in the manual said that you can't leave the driverseat while ya driving a RV down the road...Duhh...

Having spent the majority of my career in some sort of customer service, we have developed categories of people we deal with. One of them is "I'm stupid and it's your fault." Seems appropriate here.

Point taken. True about the media never giving the correct (and true) facts. Still, sometimes the punitive damage awards are a bit on the high side. I'm sure the skin grafts also were attributed to the fact that lady was elderly. (exactly how old? I don't know) I know that when you are also "frail" as the case may be, you have a tendency to also injure quite easily. Did the other serious injuries require skin grafts also? Any burn is serious, but when it was stated as serious injuries, how bad were the burns? One, two or third degree? I understand totally that you have to hit a pocketbook or two to get a response, but in return we have the trickle down effect. RE: Insurance rates going sky high. What about the gentleman that sued Phillip-Morris because he was "addicted" to cigarettes and that they gave him lung cancer which he eventually succumbed to? Heck everyone knows that cig's cause lung cancer. Sorry, no award there.

all these years, and that is the first true account i ever read of that suit. very interesting how the media uses what it wasnts out of a story to get a desired reaction.

i have had the misfortune of having to retain an attorney or two in my time, and had nothing but postive experiences with them.

i hate people who generalize a group of people.

damn,posted too slow again!!!!

Somebody correct me if I am wrong. From what I remember of that McD/coffee suit, the lady went through the drive through, got the coffee, and put the cup between her thighs as she drove out. Is this correct or am I having a brain spasm?

patatjemet, no court at all today, and I don't think I've ever had a bad day in court. I don't mind your sentiments, they're about as accurate as the completely made up RV lawsuit you site. Never happened.

http://www.snopes.com/autos/techno/cruise.asp

Bobber, not familiar with the one you site, but I'm guessing there are some facts left out there as well.

dcg - the injuries in the other cases were significant enought to require medical attention and put McDonalds on notice that there was a problem. You intimate that the punitive damage award was too high. Do you know how much it was? Do you know how much it would need to be to impact a multi-billion dollar corporation? All I'm saying is people need all the facts before they jump to conclusions and you rarely get that from the media.

I posted too slow also SJ. I don't hate lawyers. I think highly of my cousins and most lawyers. I just hate the dumb a**ses that bring forth the suits for THEIR stupididty. RV-guy, what Bobber posted earlier too about the lawn mower dude. Those are the ones I want to throttle. Hey, we all have to make a living! BUT trying to make some easy money is a bit much on my part.
Heck, my best friend from high school got a settlement on the Phen/fen suit. But she IS sick. There are 2 sides to stories. Sometimes 3!

She wasn't driving, she was a passenger.

Rotten Ronnie's coffee is good if you're bunged up. One cigarette and some of their java and POW! you're off to the bano.

My two cents on punitive damages (by the way, I am an attorney): The real issue is not how much a punitive award should be, but rather who should profit from it. If the trial bar truly believes its mantra that massive punitive damage awards are necessary to punish the corporate wrongdoer and deter others from similar conduct, how does it follow that those non-compensatory awards should go to the plaintiff and his/her attorney? Would not this money, which is essentially a fine levied for the common good, do more for the common good if dedicated, at least in large part, to charitable organizations or civic or public services? After all, the punishment to the defendant is the same, and society as a whole benefits. Or could it be that massive punitive damage awards are invariably sought in personal injury and product liability cases exactly because this does not happen?

I agree that we should be outraged when we encounter corporate indifference to the public safety. I also feel that we should be outraged at a legal system that provides a financial incentive to plaintiff’s attorneys to put their hands in the pocket of every American who pays insurance premiums or purchases goods or services. Our legal system can and should compensate victims. Compensatory damages are designed to do just that. However, when it is determined that non-compensatory punishment in the form of punitive damages is warranted, our legal system is also very effective at redistribution of wealth and unjust enrichment.

Law, how much was the punitive damages? I had heard (opps, not a realiable source!) that is was in excess of a million dollars. Is that correct?
True again about the media just wants to "titillate" the masses, but wouldn't you think (there I go thinking again!) that the media attention in itself and all the finger-pointing and tounge-wagging that McD's would have done something about it? (re: fixing the problem) Bad publicity is not good for anyone. Corporation or not! And if you get plenty of it and often, maybe picket them? (remember those good old days?) That would have probably a better impact than money. Heck, they made up that punitive damage award in no time I'm sure.

OK, now there are 2 lawyers I like

dcg - you made my point - there are always sides - I just think people should know something about them (like whether the suit ever even existed :rolleyes: ) before spouting off opinions about the outcome.

dc - we just crossed each other. i was speaking to patatjemet.

no worries, you still be my homegirl. i am with you on frivilous lawsuits. my bro'g friend got rear ended last week, (her CAR guys, settle down), and he told me she's suing. the reason? she has a predisposed back injury & some genetic med condition. now, with the accident, she will lose MORE work, and has no time left. so, she is suing this guy cuz she has already missed too much work. i gave him such flack!!!

DANG! everytime i get the phone, i miss 5 posts. mine are all outta context now. waaaaaah!

KC - I agree with you 100% - California has started moving in that direction. Injured plaintiffs should be compensated and made as whole as possible, they shouldn't receive a windfall.

dcg - in excess of 1 mil would be my guess, I don't remember the specific amount - McDonalds didn't get the negative publicity until the injured party sued, thus no incentive to change prior to that. how much do you think an award would have to be to make an impact? same principle as a speeding ticket - would you be as worried if the fine was $5?

Jane, if the accident made existing injuries worse, who should bear the responsibility for that?

I usually get on my soapbox way to quick! (I think that's one of the things my dr. needs to change my meds on!) ha! I just am so tired of seeing people not taking resposibilites for their actions. Sorry guys. I'll.....get....off...soapbox....now...hey, what are yall doing with that net??!?!?!? GET that white coat offfa meeeeeeee!!!!!! HELP! I NEED A GOOD LAWYER!!!!!! :p

I have sat and heard soooooooooo many lawsuits that are frivilous that I keep swearing I am going to go through them and see if I can incorprate a few of them into one lawsuit.

Having said that, let me add, that there are tons of these suits clogging the court systems all over the country. I hold completely guilty those inept, anything for a fee, attorneys that keep these things flying.

My recommendation for frivilous suits would be to take the lawyer and his clients outside the courthouse and immediately execute them. Then put their case at the end of the yearly docket... when no one shows, dismiss it.

Lawsuits...What ever happened to good ole duels on Main St. at high noon to settle things!!??

I hate lawyers too...she makes me mow the lawn, take out the trash, cook, run the vacum, feed the ankle biters, do house repairs...Damn Lawyers!! :rolleyes:

reaper - you're damn lucky you found a lawyer to represent your sorry ass!

dcg - I'm a big fan of soapboxes - as long as they're sturdy

sorry, dc. cant help you there.

law (hey, you know i'm supposed to be in the shower right now!!), not worse, different injuries. her issue was more, not worsening pre-existing ones. did that make sense?

this girl has other issues too...

Good point!

Sweetjane...sounds like she needs some of Dr. Phil's help! Oops, wrong thread! :p

SJ - you have stuff to do - get cracking!
we'll talk more later

They should have paid all medical bills until the injured party was made whole again. (as as much as possible as were the case) and maybe $50,000 punitive damage award. (because you know that even though your bills have been paid, there will still be some reoccurring problems) but at the same time the judge could have orderd McDondalds to comply.(fix the problem) Where was OSHA during all this? Is there some agency somewhere that would make places comply to code?

Man, I gargoyled Mcd coffee lawsuit and got a pile of them. Hmmmm, I spilled one of their milkshakes in my lap once and suffered side effects throughout the whole date. Should I have sued?

$50,000 to McD's would be the equivalent of a $5 parking ticket. Where's the deterrent effect? They could absorb that amount 100 times over for less than it cost them to retrofit their machines.
OSHA would not be applicable here and I'm unaware of any codes which would apply either.

Dang now they are bringing out the big guns!
DUCKTAPE!!!! Gotta runn fasst......run Forrest run! Shoot, tripped over that dang bike I didn't see. Was not painted brightly enough or labeled correctly either. Said for ages 3 -6....

OSHA covers the employees, not the customers.

wow reaper - been hanging out with a lawyer? :p

I remember about 5 years ago having a discussion with a well known island dive shop owner about Belize and liability laws. He told me that if a frivolous lawsuit is brought to court the judge can throw it out and the court cost is charged to the filing party. Any Belizeans out there know what happens now in a frivolous claim???

reaper, I see. Hmmm, One would think that there would be something that could be done (as in some agency) as far as making places (restaurants, hotels, etc. as far as service oriented)comply to customer service and customer safety. Oh yeah, good old common sense! (there goes Pollyanna again!) Wow, what a novel idea!
But I know that does not happen. Least in my world. I think somewhere on Pluto it does exist though. Wait, forgot, Pluto is no longer considered a planet. Maybe OZ?

so would the judge have the sole authority to determine whether the suit was "frivolous"?

Hey Law, I do agree that the press makes some lawsuits seem dumber than they really are, especially the McD case, which actually proved how dumb corporations can be. I would also point out that "Borat" has also fooled people like Boutros Boutros-Ghali, former UN Secretary General, who Cohen, as Ali G, addressed as Boutros-Boutros-Boutros and persuaded to identify the funniest-sounding language...I think Boutros-Ghali said it was French. And my husband hates lawyers too, even though he doesn't do anywhere near that many chores. Happy Weekend.

Law...that's my impression from the conversation.

dvgirl...A restaurant is inspected by the health dept. for safe food.
The fire dept. for safe egress, fire protection etc.
the building dept. to make sure it won't fall down in a storm or earthquake.
And OSHA, only if a worker is injured.
So you should feel rather safe in a restaurant!

Safe unless you actually go back in the kitchen and watch the chefs...no disrespect to chefs intended, but it can get kind of interesting.

sea - I like you!

reaper, I would not be in favor of the chilling effect a system like that could have

Law...It's a rather interesting concept, that's why I would like to hear from someone "in the know".

as a target of a frivolous lawsuit (which i won, but cost me money for legal counsel)i would be all for such a system. in my case, i asked the judge if he would/could please punish the real guilty party and was told i should be happy with what i got.

the "loser pays" system has been bandied about here in the U.S. - not a good idea IMO
I'd also be interested to know how it works in Belize.

I heard a story once about a lawsuit brought by an American in Mexico, after the American fell into an unmarked hole in the sidewalk and injured his ankle. Judge sent someone out to stand by the hole in the sidewalk. Turns out hundreds of people passed by in a day and no one else fell in. Suit dismissed.
No idea if this is true or not, but thought it was kinda funny!

Any suit brought by any person for actions occurring while someone else is holding their beer for them should be dismissed immediately. :rolleyes:

Bobber, I can't believe you let other people hold your beer. You must be a trusting sort!!

To those of you that so emphatically state that you hate lawyers, I ask you, "Why?" To categorically lump thousands of people together and declare hatred for them is as stupid as saying that you hate doctors or pre-school teachers, or....hmmmmmm.....salesmen. Just a thought.

how about telemarketers? Hold my beer while I look something up (not by the bottom part, damnit, hold it by the neck so it stays cold. Jeez, do I have to tell you everything)

Is it okay to hate leeches and mosquitoes (and people who drink your beer when they're just supposed to be holding it)?

Redundant. Anyone who drinks your beer when they are just supposed to be holding it is a leech.

So sue 'em!!

What about holding your wallet?

I have a wife for that!!

If you have a wife, why would you need a wallet? Besides to hold pictures of the family?

OK, dcg. Here's the scoop. I carry a wallet to hold my id. This is necessary because when I go shopping with the lovely Mrs Bobber, she picks out what she wants and abandons me at the checkout. I will write the check and be asked for id. I have it right there in my wallet. She keeps hers in her purse. Purse being defined as a receptacle for stuff that is immediately transported to another dimension. Were she asked to provide id, it would take hours to locate. By having a wallet holding my id, we can be out in minutes.

Only reason I carry mine is to carry ID to prove I'm old enough to drink adult beverages to all the barkeeps that ask. As for purses, kinda the same as dryers and socks. Some things enter only to never be seen again.

Purse, also known as "personal black hole" I have stuff that I am still looking for in mine.

How about a new reality show. Producers put a fender from a '52 chev in each of four womens purses. The first one to find the item in their purse wins something really stupid. :rolleyes:

Mrs. Bobber is such a lucky woman!!!

How do you know Mrs. Bobber is a woman?

:p

Hahahahahaha! 'Sif!

Everybody wants in on the action it seems:

Will the real Borat please stand up? Fri Nov 10, 8:39 AM ET



Will the real Borat please stand up?

Turkish Internet celebrity Mahir Cagri is in London to press his case that he is the inspiration for the spoof Kazakh journalist, the creation of British comedian Sacha Baron Cohen whose Borat movie is taking the world's box office by storm.

The 44-year-old's Web site, with its "I Kiss You!!!!!" greeting, made him an unlikely Internet hero seven years ago.

Web surfers were hooked by Cagri's larger-than-life persona, cheesy holiday snaps and prominent nose and mustache.

"I like to take foto-camera (amimals, towns, nice nude models and peoples)," his site explains in less than perfect English, giving his personal details as: "My tall 1.84 cm (6.2 feet) My weight 78 kg. My eyes green. I live alone!"

In an interview Thursday, Cagri appeared and sounded uncannily like the fictitious Borat, the mustachioed man from Kazakhstan who offended people there by saying that they kept women in cages and drank fermented horse urine.

Interviewers could be forgiven for thinking they were being led into the kind of comic set-up that Cohen engineers.

After seeing the Borat film, Cagri now worries people who watch it might think he is like the on-screen character, who mocks Kazakhstan, indulges in naked wrestling and makes jokes at the expense of Jews on a raucous trip across the United States.

"If you (see) this, what you think about me?" he told Reuters in broken English. "Mahir is a very bad comedian, Mahir is a homosexual, Mahir may be say the bad things about Jewish people? This is very bad."

Cagri set up his Internet page (www.ikissyou.org) in the late 1990s to make new friends and possibly find a partner.

INTERNET SENSATION

At first he was taken aback by the sensation caused by the page, featuring photographs of him in skimpy swimwear on a beach, surrounded by young women and playing table tennis.

Computer billionaire Bill Gates was reportedly among his fans, and he embarked on a world tour on the strength of his sudden popularity appearing on chat shows and in commercials.

"I am a normal man. I never dreamed I would be famous, I would go to America. Suddenly I am famous. All people know me. All famous people know me too."

Now he is seeking publicity in the wake of Cohen, whose Borat film opened at the top of the U.S. charts earlier this month, taking an impressive $26.4 million in its first weekend.

"The world's media writes that Borat imitates and copies Mahir. He copies me, and he imitates me in a bad way," he said, adding that he is even considering legal action against Cohen.

Cohen was not immediately available for comment, but has said Borat was influenced by a doctor he met in southern Russia.

Cagri plans to make his own movie to show the "real Mahir."

Meanwhile, as his Web site says, he is open to offers.

"Who is want to come TURKEY I can invitate ... She can stay my home."

Mmmmm, fermented horse urine. That takes me back.

Law,
I was thinking you would be smarter then this...
Did I ever mention something about a cruise control in my post? Another typical lawyer...
Making stuff up along the way.
Also, you should know to respect your elder....
I really dont like to waste my valuable time with lawyers, so have a great life and I hope I never run into you in bze.

mrs. nuts here - mr. nuts says to say... patatjemet seems to have a problem with intelligent women! (Gotta love that guy)... Mr. nuts says patatjemet must have recently gotten divorced and her lawyer was better than his!!!

I'm trying to figure out how an RV keeps going while the driver is absent unless the cruise control is set or it's going down a hill??????

Maybe the "purse" was driving. It is a multifunctional accessory you know.

Murse - man purse, get with the times, guys! Or if you're a metrosexual - manbag!

(Bobber, this is not for you)

sorry about what is to come in this post but....

the most important thing that any of us can do, as humans, is to NOT assume we know what we would do until we ourselves are in the position to actually make decisions.

I was one of the drum beaters about frivolity, (former VP HR of intl co). Then, my husband was killed. Feel free to google him, Thomas Lennon, then type BWI. CNBC is currently doing a story on me and his mom, as did Miami Herald which was picked up by the AP wire.

Why? Why would the AP give a sh%^ about me...or my dead husband?

Tom was a pilot. he was flying a Mitsubishi MU2. of the 700+ MU2's made, over 27% have crashed. TWENTY SEVEN PERCENT.

And, thanks to a law passed in the 90's called GARA, you cannot sue a manufacturer for design defects or failure on an aircraft over 18 years old.

Now, Tom's plane crashed in a driveway 300 yards from the runway at 730 am on a beautiful May morning, 10 seconds after his last communication to the tower clearing him to land. There were dozens of witnesses becuase kids getting on a school bus watched plane parts fly by, as did the owner of the house who missed getting hit by mere feet, as did the man across the street who had just sat in his car and the door was torn off by the engine as he reached to close it. Not another soul sustained a single injury, save of course, my beloved husband. Thank god...i do thank god for that every day.

An Mu2 has crashed EVERY 6 weeks since my husbands crash

Bills have been put before the Senate. The FAA has been asked to investigate. I have had dinner with congressmen in washington.

The plane continues to fly.

Why?

Cause there is no one to sue. There is no accountability on ANYONE's part. I will never know why my 34 year old husband died that day. Why? Because the NTSB released the wreckage to his employers insurance company THREE hours after the crash. And, with no one to sue, there is no one to pay the hundreds of thousands of dollars it would take to find out why the plane crashed.

Needless to say, there is more and more and more to this story, but i wont bore you with it. All i have to say is, before anyone judges the merits of anything, and before anyone even for a moment thinks they know what they would do, stop yourselves. I assure you, you dont.

In order for our economic, legal and social systems to work, there MUST be accountability. If you remove it cause there doesnt seem to be a case, you could be me.

I'll get off my soap box now.

Lara, my heart goes out to you.

Lara, my condolences. A tragic and very real example of what we've been talking about.

Lara, you can stay on your soap box, if you want.
Bless you dear....big big {{{{{{{{hugs}}}}}}}}}.

nova - thanks for the support, but I suspect Fred from California (patatjemet) has some kind of agenda. There are lots of lawyers on this board, but the "hate" comments got directed at me.

Fred, if you have any info that backs up your claim such a lawsuit actually existed, I'd be real interested in looking at the facts of the case.
As for respect, you wouldn't get that from me just for being old, that would have to be earned. Your attitude, sweeping generalizations and overall conduct aren't making the mark in that regard. Thanks though for your well wishes, so far my life is pretty great!

Law - don't even waste your time responding to that kind of nonsense - hubby and I, and I imagine a few other boarders, had a few laughs at him, beyond that, worthy of nothing.

Pour a glass of something chilled and enjoy your evening girlie!

patatjemet should stick to hunting with Dick Cheney...the lawyers here shoot back! :p

You know me, I love being amused and am quite thick-skinned. I was just wondering if I was the lawyer that kicked his ass! Glass already in hand, getting ready to head out with friends is a couple of hours.
Enjoy in your neck of the woods as well.

reaper - you've got me smiling here, as always!

Lawyer joke sent to me from a pal in San Pedro...

What do you call 10 skydiving lawyers?

Skeet! :p

Interesting, about the McD's case. If there was no notice, very likely a different outcome. As a defense attorney, we love when there is no notice because we can often get out of the case. I can't understand why McD's refused to pay the plaintiff's meds - wonder how much they were. McD's was in the wrong and should have stepped up to the plate early. Pay if you owe!

Your Honor Denny: On a serious note, do you have an opinion or comment on this: If a defendant in a civil suit files an MSJ and its denied and the Judge overrules all the evidentiary objections (with no rhyme or reason as most of them would have been excluded pre-trial based on sound law), the defendant then files a writ, what percentage of writs are granted? I did some research here in California, looking at the venue of this case -about 1 percent. Amazing. My Judge was a wacko and I heard that he has never seen a plaintiff he didn't like!

Laurie, Did you writ? you go girl!

you're right on the notice issue, lack of notice would have made a difference in terms of punitive damages. It's my understanding that McD's settled the smaller cases, but didn't want to "set a precident" with injuries this substantial. I read a very indepth article on this case in some law journal - I'd like to see if I can find it again.

I love lawyers. I take money from them for a living.

I think that milkshake in one's lap could well cause hypothermia--actionable, even.

Keep those cases coming!!

CatMo: I can see the facts now - man files suit claiming he spilled his frozen milkshake and sustained frozen balls, now sterile. LOL.

A lot of lawyers out there are slime, no doubt. Sooner or later everybody needs one, and if you get a good one, life is good.

My dad said, many years ago, that "A really great lawyer is one who can get a guilty man freed and an innocent man hung."

Kind of sums it up, in my opinion.

And if a town is too small for one lawyer...two lawyers will THRIVE! :p

I got a good one and life IS great...but her retainer fee is really high!!!!

Wanted to post this after the post from patatjemet (01:10 PM), but it took me all day just to find it...

Annual Stella Awards
Once again, it's time to review the winners of the Annual Stella Awards.

The Stella's are named after 81-year-old Stella Liebeck who spilled coffee on herself and successfully sued McDonalds. That case inspired the Stella Awards for the most frivolous successful lawsuits in the United States.

6th place
19-year-old Carl Truman of Los Angeles, California, won $74,000 &medical expenses when his neighbor ran over his hand with a Honda Accord. Mr. Truman apparently did not notice there was someone at the wheel of the car when he was trying to steal the hubcaps.

5th place
Terrence Dickson of Bristol, Pennsylvania, was leaving a house he had just finished robbing by way of the garage. He was not able to get the garage door to go up since the automatic door opener was malfunctioning. He could not reenter the house because the door connecting the house and garage locked when he pulled it shut. The family was on vacation and Mr. Dickson found himself locked in the garage for 8 days. He subsisted on a case of Pepsi he found and a large bag of dry dog food. He sued the house owners insurance claiming the situation caused him undue mental anguish. The jury agreed to the tune of $500,000.

4th place
Jerry Williams of Little Rock, Arkansas, was awarded $14,500 and medical expenses after being bitten on the buttocks by his next door neighbor's Beagle dog. The Beagle was on a chain in its owner's fenced yard. The award was less than sought because the jury felt the dog might have been a little provoked at the time, as Mr. Williams who had climbed over the fence into the yard, was shooting it repeatedly with a pellet gun.

3rd place
A Philadelphia restaurant was ordered to pay Amber Carson of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, $113,500, after she slipped on a soft drink and broke her coccyx (tailbone). The beverage was on the floor because Ms. Carson had thrown it at her boyfriend 30 seconds earlier during an argument.

2nd place
Kara Walton of Claymont, Delaware, sued the owner of a night club in a neighboring city when she fell from the bathroom window to the floor and knocked out two of her front teeth. This occurred whilst Ms. Walton was trying to crawl through the window in the ladies room to avoid paying the $3.50 cover charge. She was awarded $12,000 &dental expenses.

1st place
This year's runaway winner was Mr. Merv Grazinski of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Mr. Grazinski purchased a brand new Winnebago Motor Home. On his trip home from an OU football game, having driven onto the freeway, he set the cruise control at 70 mph and calmly left the drivers seat to go into the back and make himself a cup of coffee. Not surprisingly, the RV left the freeway, crashed & then overturned. Mr. Grazinski sued Winnebago for not advising him, by reading the owner's manual, that he actually could not do this. The jury awarded him $1,750,000 plus a new Winnebago Motor Home. The company actually changed their manuals on the basis of this suit just in case there were any other complete morons buying their recreation vehicles.

Great reading, Short, and very funny, as long as you know that every one of those cases is fictional and never happened.

http://www.breakthechain.org/exclusives/lawsuits.html

LMAO, can you imagine me searching for this one the whole day, and it turns out to be a hoax! Well, at least I learned something, and had fun in the process.
Thanks Law

Seems like this thread should now be renamed "THEY WALK AMONG US". Who should be responsible for the medical expenses on this idiot? The fireworks manufacturer for not labeling against this, the JackAss show, or the dummy who stuck them in his rear end?
---------------------------------
LONDON (AFP) - A man was rushed to hospital in Britain with severe internal injuries after trying to launch a powerful firework from his bottom, an ambulance service spokesman said.
It is thought that the 22-year-old could have been trying to imitate a scene from "Jackass: The Movie", a controversial film featuring a series of edgy pranks.

Footage of the incident in Sunderland, north-east England, was captured on a mobile phone by a gang of youths and shows a white flash followed by hysterical laughter and a youth shouting: "Ha ha ha ha," followed by an expletive.

A spokesman for the North East ambulance service said: "We received a call stating there was a male who had a firework in his bottom and it was bleeding."

He is now recovering in a Sunderland hospital after sustaining internal injuries including a scorched colon.

The incident took place on November 5, when Britons light bonfires and let off fireworks to commemorate a 17th century plot to blow up the Houses of Parliament.
------------------------------------
We have a saying here in our little town: You can educate ignorance, but you can't fix STUPID!!! :rolleyes:

Read that in the paper yesterday - what a dumbass!!! (So, who will he sue - the movie producers, the fireworks company - I'm sure there was no warning about sticking them in you butt and lighting them...guess there will be now!)

Exactly, nova. When will people learn that they have to be responsible for their own acts? I don't think there is enuff alcohol in the world for me to do this trick. But, I also would never pour a cup of coffee, even from my home brewer, and put it in a paper cup, and place it between my thighs....nope, not gonna chance hurting myself. But, maybe if I could play it up for a million $$ or so, ..hmmmm, nope, I'd still feel mighty stupid for doing something so dumb.
My husband is in the Elec/HVAC business, and remarked the past few times we've been in AC that the way things work there would NEVER work here in the USA. The outlets don't have GFI's, nor do they have "toddler covers" but yet, there are still kids running around, and people aren't playing with toasters in the bathtub. Hmmm....guess Belizians have a little more common sense than we do. But, they also don't have the law suits going on that we have here. They seem a bit more responsible for their acts. Wonder what the difference is? Education? Common Sense? Lack of Lawyers? Parental guidance? Who knows, but sure seems like a good thing.

Most of it is a function of having approximatley 1/1200 the population. Ergo, less mathematical probability.

Can you sue McDs for brainfreeze after drinking a milkshake too fast? The pain and suffering must be worth at least a million or two.

I used to work for Sears Canada HQ. An elderly customer of ours sued Sears for a crazy amount because she lost her balance and fell off a chair, purchased from Sears. There are stupid greedy Canadians too. If I recall, she got squat.

I don't know that population size has a great impact on stupidity, but it may. I know that "stupid is as stupid does" and although I'm sure there is stupid everywhere (perhaps more concentrated in certain areas), it seems a shame for people to gain anything other than experience from their own stupidity. I'm not saying that there aren't instances where other should be held accountable for mishaps, but I think you know where I'm coming from.

And, Laura, I am sooo sorry for your loss. It just doesn't make sense to not have a venue to place responsibility. But, I have to ask, knowing what you know, the pilots must know as well. Why do they continue to fly these planes? We know that the chances of crashing is almost an absolute, so why would anyone willingly get behind the controls of one? Would you get into a car that was known to have severe safety issues? Even if the manufacturer WAS able to be held accountable, would it be worth your life? I just don't understand.
I am just so sorry your husband was taken from you. My heart breaks for you and yours.

Of course it does, S&S, at least with respect to frequency. It's all relative. The population size merely lends itself to less frequency & probability of manifesting any characteristic, thus less opportunity for occurrences of any given event or characteristic.

Most likely, if one could categorically define "Stupid" events, the per capita ratio would be no different in virtually any country. Geo-political/socio-economic boundaries are not rigid with respect to human frailties and idiosyncrasies

Wonder what caused these companies to have to list these warnings...

On a blanket from Taiwan: Not to be used as protection from a tornado.

Warning on fireplace log:Caution -- Risk of Fire.

A warning on a pair of shin guards manufactured for bicyclists: Shin pads cannot protect any part of the body they do not cover.

Warning on an electric router made for carpenters: This product not intended for use as a dental drill.

On a bottle of shampoo for dogs: Caution: The contents of this bottle should not be fed to fish.

On a hair dryer: Do not use in shower.

On Marks & Spencer bread pudding: Product will be hot after heating.

On a string of Chinese made Christmas lights: For indoor or outdoor use only.

On Sainsbury's peanuts:Warning: Contains nuts.

On an American Airlines packet of nuts: Instructions - open packet, eat nuts.

On some frozen dinners: Serving suggestion: defrost.

On a hotel provided shower cap: Fits one head.

On Nytol Nighttime Sleep-Aid: Warning: May cause drowsiness.

Warning on a cartridge for a laser printer: Do not eat toner.

A wheel 13" a wheelbarrow warns: Not for highway use.
Can of self-defense pepper spray warns: May irritate eyes.

Warning on a Conair Pro Style 1600 hair dryer: Do not use in shower. Never use while sleeping.

Silly Putty package warning: Not for use as earplugs.

On a bag of Fritos: You could be a winner! No purchase necessary. Details inside.

Baby stroller warning: Remove child before folding.

Household iron warns: Never iron clothes while they are being worn.

A fireplace lighter cautions: Do not use near fire, flame or sparks.

A handheld massager warns consumers: Don't use while sleeping or unconscious.

Warning on underarm deodorant: Do not spray in eyes.

Cardboard car sun shield that keeps sun off the dashboards warns: Do not drive with sun shield in place.

Warning on a sharpening stone: Knives are sharp.

Bottle water label warns: Twist top off with hands. Throw top away. Do not put top in mouth.

On a box or rat poison: Warning: Has been found to cause cancer in laboratory mice.

On a Domino's Pizza boxCaution: Contents hot!

Toilet bowl cleaning brush warns: Do not use orally.

Nova....ROFLMUO! But one does have to wonder, what ever in the world prompted the companies to list these warnings?
Things that make you go Hmmmmm?!?!?!

Sun and Sand, how fortunate you are that you have never made a mistake or had an accident which resulted in an injury which someone else could have prevented and chose not to because they were more concerned about their bottom line.

Sorry, Law. Not at all what I meant. Of course, I have made mistakes, and of course, I have suffered losses from these mistakes. I don't however, hold anyone responsible for a stupid act on my part. If my loss could have been prevented by a manufacturer placing a warning on the product that produced the loss, and it wasn't an obvious threat, perhaps I can consider myself fortunate. But, come on...you know there are plenty of people out there who would love to blame their misfortune on someone else, even if it could have been prevented by using a little common sense. Law, I'm not saying there aren't times that these suits are valid....but seems there are more that aren't than are. As for bottom lines, of course human life should be above it. But, when do we take responsibility for ourselves? And, by the way, your condensending attitude was expected. Way to go.

S&S, I completely agree there are lawsuits filed which are completely without merit. They do not, however, constitute the majority of suits or anywhere close to it. In general, the courts work exactly as they are supposed to. Like everything else, it is the abberations which get all the attention.
In the McDonalds case, as was noted, the jury accorded some of the fault to both parties and awarded compensatory damages accordingly. That is as it should be, there was some fault on both sides. However, McDonalds KNEW they had a problem, they also knew people commonly hold their drinks between their legs while driving away. Agreed, anyone who does such a thing takes a risk, but no one expects to take the risk of third degree burns requiring skin grafts. And that type of injury could have been prevented, either by way of retrofitting or warning that the coffee was hotter than anyone in the industry considered safe and could produce injuries well beyond what could normally be expected from coming into contact with a cup of coffee.
I do apologize f my attitude seems condesending to you; perhaps it is because yours seems so superior.

Touche', Law. If I sound superior, I apologize, as that is NOT my opinion. I am not saying that there aren't legitimate efforts by the courts, and I agree that this judicial system in this country is wonderful. Never intended to imply otherwise. My opinion that often times we as human beings forget that when we get out of bed, there is a certain element of risk in everything we do. Our parents were quick to tell us not to run with scissors. I learned from my mom not to do that. I would never expect that there should be fine print on the package warning me not to do so. We had two brothers in the ER recently who both were injured in an axe toss. DUHHH!!!! Sharp, heavy items being tossed back and forth. Should they have printed on them "not to be used as a ball" or something similar? All I am saying is we need to stop being so quick to blame others for our stupidity. I think everyone has a right to be stupid, but some people just abuse the privilege.

Everyone agrees to assume certain risks and there are activities which have inherent risks (axe tossing comes to mind ); however, when the risk far surpasses what could be considered normal, the responsibility lies with the party creating the risk and failing to warn thereof.
That said, there will always be people who fail to take responsibility for their own actions.
I do believe it is a matter of perspective. Knowing the law and the rationale for those legal principles make some of these situations much easier to understand.

I guess you are right that in knowing the law can make understanding these issues easier. I don't profess to know the law, and feel it is better left to people like yourself to defend those who need it, and prosecute those who need it. I enjoy a good banter now and then, but don't want to have every conversation become a debate. We can agree to disagree, and life will go on. Just give me a chance to voice my opinion now and then, and I'll be happy, without trying to change your opinion to match mine. If we all thought alike, we wouldn't need attorneys, so you have job security in that....and I have job security because there will always be stupid people doing stupid things and hurting themselves.

S&S
The reason it doesnt make sense to you why someone would fly if there is a problem is multi fold.
1) Before the pinto was pulled, if you were one of the people that blew up, before you blew up, i assure you your family didnt know there was a safety issue. It took lawsuits and the Pinto being pulled before it became mass knowledge. There is no media, until recently on the MU2, and even that...until me, how many of you had heard of it?
2) If you are a pilot, and you have a family to support since you were laid off from a major airline due to a couple planes being flow into a couple big buildings in NYC, you take whatever ****ty measely job you can get. you do what you have to do, cause its the only way you know to make a living. this, however, does not excuse the company who chose these planes to fly rather than a safer one. Tom was considered one of the best trained pilots in the US on the MU2. If you research, despite all the warnings, statistics and other information available, some people continue to argue they are safe to fly. Tom was not one of those people, he, like a fork lift driver, operated the machine he was told he had to operate. He didnt look into the safety rating, just like a fork lift driver wouldnt look into the safety rating of the exact make and model of the lift they were asked to operate.
3)If you dont know what information to look for, you wont find it.

hindsight is 20/20, but it doesnt mean that the individual is necessarily culpable when manufacturer, employer and 2 branches of government know the problems exist still do nothing.

FYI and for the record...
I do absolutely agree that somewhere along the line our society (US that is) seems to have lost its sense of personal accountability and responsibility as well.

just throwing that out there.

I agree with you, Lara. I drove a pinto, and sold it once the data came out, because I had two little kids in there with me. I also told the buyer the reason I was getting rid of it, and they knew the risk. I am not at all thinking your Tom knew about the severity of the problems and yet continued to fly this craft. I think, however, that if my boss told me to stand in front of a train as part of my job, I would decline and look for employment elsewhere, especially since I have loved ones depending on me and my paycheck. To take a different route, although lesser paid, but much safer, is what I would attempt while continuing to look for what I was trained to do, with a responsible company that placed a value on human life. I do think the manufacturer should be culpable in this case, as they know they are responsible for the integrity of this plane, just as McDonald's is responsible for the temperature of it's coffee. I'm not negating the responsibility issues here. What I'm saying is that when people start litigating over fast food making them fat, cigarettes causing lung cancer, things we KNOW happen, but refuse to take responsibility for it happening to us, when we ignore all warnings, and feel that we are due monetary gain from doing it anyway and becoming injured, then there is something wrong with the system that supports this.

"Convince a man against his will and he'll be of the same opinion still"

"There's no sense in wrestling with a pig, all that happens is you both get up muddy"

"There's no sense in trying to teach a pig to sing, it just frustrates you and annoys the pig."

tru dat

Too funny, seashell. Very true!!

Should I be offended by this?

only if ya wanna be

Sing something for us, PB.

Just don't let it be annoying. :rolleyes:

Oh, this should be good! (pulling up chair, drink in hand)

some good ones there, mrs.nuts especially the one about the NUTS! tee hee!

Thanks Rykat - somehow I knew you'd like that one!

Did I miss the singing?

Boo Hoo, yet another one jumps on the bandwagon:

Woman in `Borat' seeks investigation By PETER PRENGAMAN, Associated Press Writer
Fri Nov 17, 1:39 AM ET



The owner of an etiquette business who was handed a plastic bag supposedly containing feces in the hit movie "Borat" says she was told the filming would be used for a documentary in Belarus.

Cindy Streit said she filed a complaint Thursday with California Attorney General Bill Lockyer, requesting an investigation into possible violations of the California Unfair Trade Practices Act.

Streit said a representative from a Los Angeles-based company called Springland Films contacted her Birmingham, Ala.-based company, Etiquette Training Services, about arranging an etiquette session for an "international guest from Belarus Television."

Attempts to find a contact for Springland were not successful. The company had no phone listing and Streit's lawyers declined to provide copies of the contracts allegedly signed.

The attorney general's office had not received a copy of the complaint, spokesman Nathan Barankin said late Thursday.

Streit said she arranged in Alabama both a sit-down session with Borat, played by comedian Sacha Baron Cohen, and a dinner party with some of her friends. Clips of both appear in the movie "Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit of Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan."

Though awkward at times, the dinner went well until Borat asked to use the bathroom, Streit said.

"I had taught him to excuse himself. He did that correctly and went upstairs," Streit told The Associated Press. "The next thing that happened is that he came down the stairs holding this plastic bag with whatever was in it."

"My horror was that he had brought a bag of feces to my dinner table," she said.

Springland put in writing that the second of two scheduled sessions "will be filmed as part of a documentary for Belarus Television and for those purposes only," said Gloria Allred, Streit's lawyer.

A spokesman for 20th Century Fox, which distributed the film, called Allred's contentions "nonsense."

"Cindy Streit signed written agreements with the production, which clearly stated that a movie was being filmed and that the movie could be distributed worldwide. Her fee was negotiated and paid," said studio spokesman Gregg Brilliant.

Several weeks after filming completed, Brilliant said, Streit asked for and received additional payment for her etiquette training service and she signed an additional release. He said he didn't have details on how much she received.

Streit, 59, said she requested an investigation by the attorney general instead of filing a lawsuit in hopes of setting a precedent that will make movie studios think twice before using other ordinary citizens for "reality movies." However, she said she wouldn't rule out a lawsuit.

Streit's demand follows complaints by others shown in the film, including a lawsuit filed by two fraternity members from a South Carolina university who appear in the film drunk.

Great publicity! More clever marketing.

All of the people in the Borat film signed away their stupidity for money in the form of a release. Now they want to sue. I'm sure there will be many hapless attorneys jumping on that bandwagon. How sad.

Love them lyars...

Hapless?

Maybe you mean "hatless."

Jesse, have you no creativity? :rolleyes:

CatMo, I'm almost always hatless.

No ambulances this morning?

Nope, I mean hapless. As in wretched. The suits have no merit and they know it, but will pursue litigation anyway.

Jesse, see, I knew you could do it if you just set your mind to it.

luv, gotta agree with you - they're out there. Just because you can get someone to file a suit on your behalf doesn't mean you have a case.

Gosh Law, if Jesse/weather is equating all lawyers, does that mean that all newspaper publishers are alike? Murdoch ring any bells?

Thats one of my other names.

Hapless means unlucky or unfortunate. I dunno...maye that works.

I'd have just gone with wretched. I like it better for your use as well. Paints a more vivid picture, if you will.

we know.......shall we list more of them?

(applicable to 2nd post up )

Careful...or I'll hafta send my lyars after ya.

I'm skeered!

I am suing McD's... nowhere on my milkshake container did I see the warning: "Do Not Use Contents To Clean Electrical Sockets" Nearly fried my hands off.

Watch it klcman...He retains the firm of "Dewey, Cheetim and Howe"!

it's ok, 2M knows where he lives!

Dewey, Cheatham and Howe LOL (car tawk?) I too take money from lawyers for a living. Someone's gotta do it! BTW, hapless also means wretched, luckless, illfated and miserable, all of which apply to some of those types.

nothing like a little inconsistency to accompany those gross generalizations

Sarcastic humour is like that.

I thought that when you got drunk, you got smarter (and better looking). Hmmmm.

Geeeeesh KLC, Do I Gotta Mix some more Cement again? My arms are gettin tired :rolleyes: Can I at least mix some newspapers into the cement to make it easy?

things that make ya go hmmmmm, bobber ? :p

paper mache, 2M ?

jesse mache?

that might actually float instead of sink

ok then solid it will be. Will hold foreva, welllll, That's what Vinny told me any ways.

Cuicui Cuicui: Had a shake at McDonald's last night...it was sooo cold, that it turned me nipplie. Should I file a Tart? Bill

Prez for the Duration, you should definitely do something with a tart.

:p :p

Just curious, anyone know where I can get my own tart?

I believe they have websites for that sort of thing. :p

I don't dare click on that klc. (I have my standards)

uh huh :rolleyes:

Oh good grief - I thought you guys were talking about baking. :rolleyes:

I did as well Law. I had my mixing bowl, flour and spatula at the ready. Imagine my disappointment!

Ok, from another (ex) lawyer...there are not two sides to a story...there are at least three, (in family matters), his, hers, and the truth.

PalapaBob: We all understood that you had No Standards as indicated on your application for the SPA-SC. APPLICATION DENIED !!! Aggressively: Bill Thornton, Prez for Life, SPA-SC.. ..seal

Ok Prez... I am totally confused now. Which application are we talking about now? PB has submitted so many....

I'm not sure we can deny his application for membership now since he was already voted in... over our objections I may add...

But since his entry into our esteemed organization he has proved somewhat, worthy.

I have studied his No Standard statement and have come to the following conclusion.

When he stated to us he had No Standards, I think that was the truth. The fact now that he claims to have Standards is a lie... which makes him an excellent member of the SPA-SC, in good standing, since he likes to lie.

I await your re-conditioned decision, upon your complete review of the case.

Sincerely,
Denny Shane, Treas. <--- new and improved Seal

imposing martial law might be an effective work around here.

I wasn't aware he had a spatula

OK, here's my suggestion for an anti-social and Arthurian style rite of passage. After he pulls the golden spatula out of the bucket of grease, he has to compete against King Bill in a tart-making contest, so that if he wins, he will go to St Louis to cook for the cardinals and be a god. But can a simple fry-cook like him be worthy and well-skilled for such an honor?

Don't get me started on gravy ladles.

I also have the Golden Gravy Boat & Ladle.

I didn't know we had anything... Bill, you been hiding crap from me again?

I always felt the SPASC was a BYOA type of club.