Jm-airbus320 From Jamaica, joined Aug 2000, 304 posts, RR: 0 Posted (13 years 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 1810 times:
I just saw what has got to be a continuation of some of the most ridiculous lawsuits in America being discussed on MSNBC. This lady bought a Wendy's chicken sandwich, ate it while driving, the sandwich was hot as it always is.......the sauce in the sandwich spewed out at her when she bit it and she got burned on the mouth and cheek. She is now suing the company for mental, emotional and physical anguish. My question is, who is responsible to take the necessary care when eating? Would she sue them if she had coked on it too?
I Like To Fly From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1188 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (13 years 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1724 times:
Claim the worker who made the sandwich died in the process of making it. Sue the stupid-ass woman claiming that if she would have never ordered it their beloved coworker would have never died. Entire restaurant can claim emotional distress over the loss while the "victim" lives it up under a new identity in the tropics from the money sent from her family.
ADG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (13 years 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1707 times:
One repercussion of these greedy people is that you can no longer enjoy nice hot food in public. Go into any coffee shop and enjoy your tepid coffee and think of women like the one mentioned above.
Lawsuits such as this one are maliciously frivilous, nothing more than a greedy grab for cash.
In Australia a boy won $1 million because he was punched in the schoolyard while a woman who's husband poured petrol on her and set her alight got $50,000 compensation :-(
This is one of the negatives of Western Society, we need to introduce an "idiot clause" where a judge can simply say "you hurt yourself because you're an idiot" and not pay any money at all. Then perhaps the rest of us can start enjoying ourselves again.
(and Dripstick .. body temperature isn't considered "hot")
Saintsman From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2002, 2065 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (13 years 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1603 times:
Whilst the woman in question leaves a lot to be desired, it's the bloody lawyers who incourage this sort of behaviour who are the real problem. I bet their cut of any award is significant, which is why they do it of course.
Even the lawyers who defend these cases make money. Hmm is this a co-incidence?