There's an interesting news article here relating to Batman and legal actions apparently being brought against the filmmakers:
It reminds me that in the Czech Republic the other week, a young man was hit by a guy driving a company car. Mortified, the driver picked up the body of the teen and dumped it in the nearby forest. Only the thing is, the teen survived and was able to identify who had hit him. Naturally, this lead to a lawsuit, but not the way you think: the company the driver was working for when he did the hit-and-run is now suing the teen that was struck by the vehicle for damage to the company car.
What happened to the days when people could only sue when they had a genuine grievance?
|Most recent blog posts from Jason Venter...|
|wolfqueen001 - November 13, 2008 (01:39 AM)
That's messed up. Reminds me of a few cases I heard about that happened here.
One involved a woman ordering a McDonald's coffee. She was warned that the cup was hot, but she put it in her lap anyway. A short time later, she spilled it on herself, burning herself somewhat severely. She then sued McDonald's for the coffee "being too hot", and I believe she won, even though she was an idiot.
The other one involved a burglar breaking into some couple's home through the window. But before he could take anything, he tripped on an extension cord and broke his leg. He then tried suing the family for carelessness or something, even though he was the one breaking into their house! Fortunately, I think the judge threw this one out... but I don't know if the burglar was prosecuted or not.
|sashanan - November 13, 2008 (09:49 PM)
While the McDonalds' coffee case is infamous, it's also not clearcut enough to serve as a good example of ridiculouls lawsuits. The coffee actually *was* hotter than safety regulations allow, and caused serious burning beyond what one might reasonably expect to be suffered by spilling coffee on one's lap. The whole story can be found on various sites and is worth checking out, just to get both sides.