|
so a little over a year ago, last halloween I had a run in with four lokos, and the thread I saw today in the general forum prompted me to start a blog on my situation.
That halloween I ended up drinking 3 of the drinks in about 2 hours. I ended up blacking out and knocking out my two front teeth. I was sent to the hospitol where I started making a scene and was promptly sent to the drunk tank for the night.
I had to have two root canals performed.
Since the incident I have been in and out of mental institutions for what was originally believed to be schizophrenia, although all of my psychiatrists have agree that I do not exhibit any of the symptoms of such.
I was also on anti-psychotics for 8 months this past year.
I was wondering what TL, especially anyone with any sort of legal background, has to say about my situation. Do you think I have a chance at a settlement? and more importantly, how do I go about starting case for something like this.
P.S.
A friend of mine bought me the four lokos, and I was underage at the time that I drank them, so factor that into any legal calculations you make.
p.p.s
i was a cop that halloween when i ended up in the prison.
TT
edit:it was a blog I saw the article in, here it is
http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=171312
props to lokiM for posting that here.
 
|
wait, what?
are you suing 4loco?
|
Legal help for not knowing your limit?
GOOD LUCK
|
no, you are just an idiot for drinking that much
|
On November 24 2010 07:49 mOnion wrote:
wait, what?
are you suing 4loco?
If i can get a consultation with a lawyer, they might be able to get a settlement out of court even... again Im a little fuzzy on all of the details but im pretty sure I have a shot.
|
On November 24 2010 07:51 Danzepol wrote:If i can get a consultation with a lawyer, they might be able to get a settlement out of court even... again Im a little fuzzy on all of the details but im pretty sure I have a shot.
lol no, no you don't
|
Only in America, lol.
If i can get a consultation with a lawyer, they might be able to get a settlement out of court even... again Im a little fuzzy on four loko but im pretty sure I have a shot.
Fixed and no, you don't.
|
There's a government warning right on the can. "Consumption of alcoholic beverages ... may cause health problems".
You're the one who drank too much, none of this has anything to do with Four Loko.
|
Since you were underage when you partook in the drinking of alcoholic beverages, that could significantly damage your chances of even going to court (It might get thrown out just on that basis).
|
You were underage, you have literally no legal standing to sue four loko since they don't sell to minors.
|
On November 24 2010 08:00 Ichabod wrote:
Since you were underage when you partook in the drinking of alcoholic beverages, that could significantly damage your chances of even going to court (It might get thrown out just on that basis).
yea thats the biggest flaw my case has right now, and really its a mjaor reason why I waited this long to start looking into the situation legally. lol.
|
On November 24 2010 08:05 Danzepol wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 08:00 Ichabod wrote:
Since you were underage when you partook in the drinking of alcoholic beverages, that could significantly damage your chances of even going to court (It might get thrown out just on that basis). yea thats the biggest flaw my case has right now, and really its a mjaor reason why I waited this long to start looking into the situation legally. lol.
you should PM hot_bid, he's graduated from law school and loves it when people ask for legal help. he won't even charge you, he's that nice!
|
Calgary25977 Posts
Don't listen to them, follow your dreams.
|
Pretty douche bag move to try to sue them for you being an idiot.
|
this sounds idiotic
being honest
|
There's been legislative action against caffeinated alcoholic beverages like four lokos, but no, you won't get a settlement out of this.
The US is fucked... -_-
|
Lol... You drank 3 of the most fucked up drinks ever in 2 hours while underaged and you think you have a case? Be happy you weren't arrested by the darwin police.
|
First Mistake: Drinking 3 four lokos
Second Mistake: Trying to Sue.
Third Mistake: Asking for legal help on TL.
|
So let me get this straight...
You see that this company is now now making/no longer shipping this drink. You remember that a year ago, while you were underage (or maybe even still are), you drank too many of these and had some adverse experiences. Now all of these issues such as the supposed schizophrenia you believe you have, and the root canals you needed due to you not being able to control yourself, are to blame because of 3 drinks you drank one evening. Naturally, also, in your view, any other issues you may have had separate from the four locos aren't attributable at all to your negative experiences (or else you can't say that the four locos were the only real cause). Going with that, you must have a very healthy, balanced lifestyle, and happened to just drink some four locos and everything went downhill from there.
Am I right?
|
hahah your trying to sue because you broke the law and drank underaged, and drank about 15 beers worth in 2 hours. hahahahahahahha even in the USA you won't even get a lawyer willing to represent you
|
wait i don't get it
you're suing four loko?
for what?
|
On November 24 2010 08:07 Chill wrote:
Don't listen to them, follow your dreams.
<3 Chill
but seriously kid let it go, its no the companies fault and I don't see how you get that at all. It is your fault and your fault alone, of course if you do have some mental illness you should get it checked out. You should thank four loko for bringing it to your attention.
|
Calgary25977 Posts
Just throwing it out there, shouldn't you have sued before the company got banned. Even if you win, what is there to win?
|
You're the embodiment of everything that is wrong with our country and bring shame to TL.
You win zero points, and my God have mercy on your soul.
|
On November 24 2010 08:24 Chill wrote:
Just throwing it out there, shouldn't you have sued before the company got banned. Even if you win, what is there to win?
ya, i didn't realize that they're completely stopping production..in all likelihood i am probably not going to follow through, unless I get some lawyer thats really adament about going through with it.
lol,
Zapdos, you got it right on the money !
|
On November 24 2010 08:14 Sadist wrote:
Pretty douche bag move to try to sue them for you being an idiot.
I agree with my BW twin.
|
On November 24 2010 08:24 Chill wrote:
Just throwing it out there, shouldn't you have sued before the company got banned. Even if you win, what is there to win?
Exactly this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4Loko
There is no way in hell you would be able to. It's not like they are sold to minors from the store.
It was you who abused the product and you paid the price.
|
When I was two years old my mommy let me play with the sharpest knife in the house. It was a fantastic knife that used to be sold in stores everywhere but now people say it is too sharp.
When I was two and mommy let me use it on my green beans I hurt myself and now I have a big scar on my pinky and it doesn't work so good anymore. Now the knifes aren't allowed to be sold in stores anymore because they're too sharp.
My mom is a complete moron and didn't read the warning label that said
"1: adult use only
2: do not use to scratch genitalia
3: keep away from children"
Think my mom can sue this company?
*insert excessive random "el oh els" and exclamation points for added douche-baggery*
^^^^^ That is what you sound like.
|
Lol. AMericans do anything for money..
|
On November 24 2010 08:32 NuKedUFirst wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 08:24 Chill wrote:
Just throwing it out there, shouldn't you have sued before the company got banned. Even if you win, what is there to win? Exactly this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4LokoThere is no way in hell you would be able to. It's not like they are sold to minors from the store. It was you who abused the product and you paid the price.
damn, looks like i was really late to start looking into legal action. all that started this October.
im basically kicking myself now then, seeing I had a whole year to get off my ass and do something.
anyway, legal action rarely hurts from what i understand.
On November 24 2010 08:37 VonLego wrote:
When I was two years old my mommy let me play with the sharpest knife in the house. It was a fantastic knife that used to be sold in stores everywhere but now people say it is too sharp.
When I was two and mommy let me use it on my green beans I hurt myself and now I have a big scar on my pinky and it doesn't work so good anymore. Now the knifes aren't allowed to be sold in stores anymore because they're too sharp.
My mom is a complete moron and didn't read the warning label that said
"1: adult use only
2: do not use to scratch genitalia
3: keep away from children"
Think my mom can sue this company?
*insert excessive random "el oh els" and exclamation points for added douche-baggery*
^^^^^ That is what you sound like.
XD
|
I think you guys are misunerstanding. He was put on medicine for a condition he doesn't have. I do not think he wants to sue because he got drunk, but rather because the medication and institutions he was put in. Just IMO
|
On November 24 2010 08:39 mptj wrote:
I think you guys are misunerstanding. He was put on medicine for a condition he doesn't have. I do not think he wants to sue because he got drunk, but rather because the medication and institutions he was put in. Just IMO
as a result of the fact that he got drunk
|
On November 24 2010 08:39 mptj wrote:
I think you guys are misunerstanding. He was put on medicine for a condition he doesn't have. I do not think he wants to sue because he got drunk, but rather because the medication and institutions he was put in. Just IMO
yes exactly. the root canals are only the begining. I basically lost a year of my life doing nothing but being a vegetable really. And of course that sounds ludicrous, but I do have multiple psychiatrists backing on that point.
|
None of which matters because the four loko company is not liable because you were underage. You CANNOT win a case, just drop it.
|
Excessive legal action is actually quite detrimental to a society as a whole. This is particularly relevant in health insurance pricing. In cases such as these when there is clearly nothing the company did wrong (sold a product to 21+ year old folks who enjoyed it)... it is definitely over the line.
|
On November 24 2010 08:43 Danzepol wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 08:39 mptj wrote:
I think you guys are misunerstanding. He was put on medicine for a condition he doesn't have. I do not think he wants to sue because he got drunk, but rather because the medication and institutions he was put in. Just IMO yes exactly. the root canals are only the begining. I basically lost a year of my life doing nothing but being a vegetable really. And of course that sounds ludicrous, but I do have multiple psychiatrists backing on that point.
I'm getting confused. Are you trying to sue four loko or the institutions or your friend who gave you the four loko's in the first place.
|
in the UK this drink wouldn't even be considered dangerous lol.
Vodka Redbull anyone? 35% alcohol 100% sugar and caffine
|
I only liked 4lokos the first 2-3 times I tried it. If you drank 3 of them theres no wonder you ended up that way.... It's also who you hang out with, I would never let any of my friends drink 2!. One and a half gets even the biggest people messed up because of that combination. It's nota good drunk either!
|
On November 24 2010 08:52 te3l wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 08:43 Danzepol wrote:On November 24 2010 08:39 mptj wrote:
I think you guys are misunerstanding. He was put on medicine for a condition he doesn't have. I do not think he wants to sue because he got drunk, but rather because the medication and institutions he was put in. Just IMO yes exactly. the root canals are only the begining. I basically lost a year of my life doing nothing but being a vegetable really. And of course that sounds ludicrous, but I do have multiple psychiatrists backing on that point. I'm getting confused. Are you trying to sue four loko or the institutions or your friend who gave you the four loko's in the first place.
What to the society where folks took responsibility for their own actions?
You state that you've been a vegetable for a full year until about three weeks ago.
You did something stupid enough to throw you in prison -- likely not just a minor in possession.
You aggressively attempted to get absolutely trashed and succeeded. (Or you're deserving of a Darwin award (http://www.darwinawards.com/) if you actually claim you didn't know it had much alcohol in it)
You are old enough to get thrown into prison, so you're an adult.
You're old enough to drink in most countries.
Some company gets in trouble and you want to jump onto the bandwagon and get your free money because you also participated in their product?
You have no case in any shape or form because all the fault rested on YOU, the adult. Grow the hell up.
|
On November 24 2010 08:53 emythrel wrote:
in the UK this drink wouldn't even be considered dangerous lol.
Vodka Redbull anyone? 35% alcohol 100% sugar and caffine
Yeah us wussy Americans limit our products to a maximum of 100% total ingredients
|
On November 24 2010 09:01 mucker wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 08:53 emythrel wrote:
in the UK this drink wouldn't even be considered dangerous lol.
Vodka Redbull anyone? 35% alcohol 100% sugar and caffine Yeah us wussy Americans limit our products to a maximum of 100% total ingredients
Think about it....
good vodka = 35% alcohol
redbull = 100% sugar and caffine (minus a bit of water and flavouring)
|
On November 24 2010 09:06 emythrel wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 09:01 mucker wrote:On November 24 2010 08:53 emythrel wrote:
in the UK this drink wouldn't even be considered dangerous lol.
Vodka Redbull anyone? 35% alcohol 100% sugar and caffine Yeah us wussy Americans limit our products to a maximum of 100% total ingredients Think about it.... good vodka = 35% alcohol redbull = 100% sugar and caffine (minus a bit of water and flavouring)
haha so when you mix 50% vodka and 50% red bull you still get a 35% drink? wow....
|
I drank 1.5 four loko's last weekend (GSL finals!) and got more drunk than I've been all year. I can't believe you didn't die drinking that many. You fucked up yourself, and if you aid in getting that beverage banned by the FDA you'll ruin it for all the competent drinkers out there.
Just goes to show how ridiculous alcohol can fuck you up if you have no idea what you're doing. Stick with weed instead.
|
you can sue your friend, but not the company.. people like you is why they made it illegal for kids to drink
|
I've had two of a similar drinks of these and I was fine, sure quite a bit drunk but I wasn't vomiting, That
s normlay how i tell if ive had too much.
|
|
|
On November 24 2010 07:47 Danzepol wrote:so a little over a year ago, last halloween I had a run in with four lokos, and the thread I saw today in the general forum prompted me to start a blog on my situation. That halloween I ended up drinking 3 of the drinks in about 2 hours. I ended up blacking out and knocking out my two front teeth. I was sent to the hospitol where I started making a scene and was promptly sent to the drunk tank for the night. I had to have two root canals performed. Since the incident I have been in and out of mental institutions for what was originally believed to be schizophrenia, although all of my psychiatrists have agree that I do not exhibit any of the symptoms of such. I was also on anti-psychotics for 8 months this past year. I was wondering what TL, especially anyone with any sort of legal background, has to say about my situation. Do you think I have a chance at a settlement? and more importantly, how do I go about starting case for something like this. P.S. A friend of mine bought me the four lokos, and I was underage at the time that I drank them, so factor that into any legal calculations you make. p.p.s i was a cop that halloween when i ended up in the prison. TT edit:it was a blog I saw the article in, here it is http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=171312props to lokiM for posting that here.
Don't have my law degree yet, and won't for a while. Take this as coming from someone who has worked for lawyers, and is studying to be one. You have no chance in hell. Why? Because you were doing something illegal (underage drinking) and labeled on all 4 locos cans is a statement saying that you must be 21 or older to drink the beverage. The judge will throw the case out of court and you may be liable for any legal charges incurred during the process by the controller of 4 locos.
Edit: I'd also like to add that people like you who do dumb shit and then sue are the reason the justice system is bogged down with trivial trash, and also the reason the law profession has been dragged through the mud. I don't even really know you all that well and I dislike you. Go look for a handout elsewhere, don't try to take someone else's hard earned money.
Edit 2: On November 24 2010 08:07 Chill wrote:
Don't listen to them, follow your dreams.
God I love you Chill
Continuation on the subject. How is anyone so morally fucked up to think this is acceptable?
Also, if you have a chance at ANYTHING it is suing the person who gave you the alcohol, claiming they pressured a minor into it, AND praying you can PROVE they gave it to you. On top of this civil action will take a LONG time and you will likely have to pay your lawyer up front, as no lawyer is going to take this case on the law equivalent of commission (they take a % of the settlement). You're much more likely to be able to pursue a criminal case against the owner of said house for allowing minors a place to drink (whether they were there or not, it is still their responsibility. It's fucked up, I know)
|
Underage binge drinking and you want to blame them?
You have to drink responsibly. I don't think you'll get anywhere with this.
|
i thought one of the basic foundations of law was that you can't be breaking the law yourself? ie if you make a contract with your buddy to rob a bank and split 50-50 and he backstabs you, you can't sue him for breach of contract +_+
oh well
pm hot_bid
|
you drank 3 4lokos in an hour and knocked your two front teeth out... and you blame the 4loko company? That shit is entirely your fault why would you be an asshole and try to sue them when it was just you being an idiot and wasn't their fault at all? The fact that you could even think about suing a company for something like that embodies everything thats wrong with the legal system in america. Have some personal accountability.
And how does you being in an out of mental hospitals for 8 months connect to this, 4lokos would not do that to you and they definitely don't give you schizophrenia :/
|
You're better off sueing the people who wrongfully accused you of being schizophrenic but that was probably your parents so i wouldn't recommend it. Everyone has drunk mistakes, live with them.
|
This is nearly as bad as the mcdonalds coffee woman.
|
Ugh, four loko tastes like cough syrup. How did you manage to down 3 of those things?
|
On November 24 2010 11:12 Ipp wrote:
You're better off sueing the people who wrongfully accused you of being schizophrenic but that was probably your parents so i wouldn't recommend it. Everyone has drunk mistakes, live with them.
Yeah you can't sue 4 Loco. You were illegally drinking so there's no chance in hell that you would win any kind of settlement. It's kind of morally fucked up but you could try suing the doctor diagnosed you as schizophrenic but I'm guessing they are covered by some kind of terms and conditions you agreed to. Stop trying to blame somebody else because you fucked up...
|
I hope you sue them and you lose horribly. It'd be icing on the cake! You deserve it 
|
On November 24 2010 11:24 jalstar wrote:
This is nearly as bad as the mcdonalds coffee woman.
Don't say that, because of her there are now warning labels on mc donald coffee cups. Truly a hero of our generation *sarcasm*
|
You might have a slim chance of getting some basic legal advice on TL if you have a simple problem and provide enough details. Unfortunately, your situation seems rather convoluted and you didn't even tell us what state you live in.
Second, why do people on the Internet feel the need to give out pretend legal opinions when they have absolutely no idea what they're talking about?
|
^^Because when you post on a starcraft forum to get legal advice you probably shouldn't expect all ivy league grads to respond, especially when your suggested lawsuit is so obviously flawed.
|
On November 24 2010 14:13 ShadowDrgn wrote:
You might have a slim chance of getting some basic legal advice on TL if you have a simple problem and provide enough details. Unfortunately, your situation seems rather convoluted and you didn't even tell us what state you live in.
Second, why do people on the Internet feel the need to give out pretend legal opinions when they have absolutely no idea what they're talking about?
doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out you can not use the legal system to get you money when you are not abiding by the legal system in the first place
but im just a person on the internet that feels the need to give out pretend opinions on legal actions and such when i have no idea what im talking about
but i can relate to "common sense" and i think this might fall under the category of "common sense"
sorry for all my grammatical errors as i dont feel the need to use commas/periods/capitolization etc etc i do like quotations tho as you can see
edit: i dont drink any alcohol including 4 locos but i do smoke weed which completely fucks you up just like these 4 locos do but for some reason ive never knocked my teeth out/had my drug dealer get banned from selling products etc etc
|
Reminds me of the lady who sued MacDonalds because she burned herself with their coffee.
|
The fact that you broke the law by consuming them underage makes u ineligible for any sort of damages if that's what u are asking. Even if you were of age, its your fault for drinking them.
|
Osaka27139 Posts
On November 24 2010 12:44 te3l wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 11:24 jalstar wrote:
This is nearly as bad as the mcdonalds coffee woman. Don't say that, because of her there are now warning labels on mc donald coffee cups. Truly a hero of our generation *sarcasm*
On November 24 2010 15:24 susySquark wrote:
Reminds me of the lady who sued MacDonalds because she burned herself with their coffee.
Yeah! Fuck her and the frivilous lawsuit that was preceded by more than 700 other burn victims. She was obviously trying to abuse the system and get rich quick. I mean, being 79 years old and all.
Liebeck sought to settle with McDonald's for US $20,000 to cover her medical costs, which were $11,000, but the company offered only $800.
I mean really, how bad can a cup of coffee be?
she had suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent.[11] She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. During this period, Liebeck lost 20 pounds (nearly 20% of her body weight), reducing her down to 83 pounds.[12] Two years of medical treatment followed.
I love it when people pull out this example, because it is actually a pretty worthwhile lawsuit, rather than a frivolous one.
|
On November 24 2010 15:02 Stoned wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 14:13 ShadowDrgn wrote:
You might have a slim chance of getting some basic legal advice on TL if you have a simple problem and provide enough details. Unfortunately, your situation seems rather convoluted and you didn't even tell us what state you live in.
Second, why do people on the Internet feel the need to give out pretend legal opinions when they have absolutely no idea what they're talking about? doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out you can not use the legal system to get you money when you are not abiding by the legal system in the first place but im just a person on the internet that feels the need to give out pretend opinions on legal actions and such when i have no idea what im talking about but i can relate to "common sense" and i think this might fall under the category of "common sense"
That isn't true though. There's a large body of law on "spring guns" where burglars have sued property owners for being injured by traps. On a more mundane level, trespassers have sued for tripping over things on land. If you try to mug someone and they respond with excessive force, you can sue them for damages. There's simply no requirement for obeying the law in order to file a lawsuit. Many aspects of the law are common sense, but others aren't.
|
No offense but thats just annoying, I hate this american attitude of sue every chance you have.
You didn't drink responsibly. That was YOUR fault not 4 lokos.
I hope nothing hpapens of this, or you sue and lose.
|
On November 24 2010 16:18 ZlaSHeR wrote:
You didn't drink responsibly. That was YOUR fault not 4 lokos.
Right. It'd be a total joke to sue the manufacturers of Four Lokos. If you could sue an alcoholic beverage maker for you getting drunk and doing something stupid, every beer, wine, and liquor company on the planet would be out of business. That's common sense. Legally speaking, you wouldn't have standing to sue them because they didn't cause your injury. They sold a product to a retailer, retailer sold it to you (or someone else who gave it to you), you drank it, and then you did something stupid and hurt yourself. It's not like the drink itself was laced with poison.
There may be other people in this story to sue though. Like... where did you get the drinks, how did you knock your teeth out, who put you in a mental institution, who put you on anti-psychotics, why were you on them for so long if the doctors agreed you weren't schizophrenic?
|
On November 24 2010 08:29 VonLego wrote:
You're the embodiment of everything that is wrong with our country and bring shame to TL.
You win zero points, and my God have mercy on your soul.
On November 24 2010 10:33 Risen wrote:
Edit: I'd also like to add that people like you who do dumb shit and then sue are the reason the justice system is bogged down with trivial trash, and also the reason the law profession has been dragged through the mud. I don't even really know you all that well and I dislike you. Go look for a handout elsewhere, don't try to take someone else's hard earned money.
On November 24 2010 16:18 ZlaSHeR wrote:
No offense but thats just annoying, I hate this american attitude of sue every chance you have.
You didn't drink responsibly. That was YOUR fault not 4 lokos.
I hope nothing hpapens of this, or you sue and lose.
All three of these posts pretty much sum my opinion.
Hope you don't go through with this because you are wasting a lot of people's time because you can't handle your booze....
|
You are the reason I want 4loko to remain legal: Free gene pool cleansing.
|
As a former District Attorney for New York County, my first and foremost advice to you, sir, is to stop seeking legal advice from the public. In many cases, the responses you receive may compel you to make your already unfortunate situation worse.
While I can’t offer you any advice on your specific case, I can comment on a hypothetical. Please note that this is in no way an offer of representation and, again, we’re just speaking hypothetically.
If one were to become injured as a result of a combination of intoxication and, as we can see evidence of here in your post, stunning natural mental incapacity, there may be grounds for a suit to be filed. One would have to establish a pattern of willful negligence on the part of the defendants in their obvious disregard for the basic tenets of judicious care and ignorance of foresight with regard to how their actions would negatively affect the offspring.
One would have to argue that the overwhelming ineptitude of the guardians that would result in the child’s tragic lack of common sense or social awareness could have been prevented by standard care, and that the child is not fundamentally flawed by mental deficiency. Should the guardians be able to offer proof of the child’s mental retardation, they would not be expected by a reasonable court to be held responsible for the child’s simple-mindedness.
Personally, I think suing your parents for your own lack judgment or basic common sense is risky, but if you think you can prove that it was their mishandling of your childhood which led you to be this dysfunctional, I wish you the best of luck. If I’ve misunderstood the specifics of this hypothetical, I apologize; I was only commenting on what I could piece together from the fragmented original post.
|
On November 24 2010 16:08 Manifesto7 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 12:44 te3l wrote:On November 24 2010 11:24 jalstar wrote:
This is nearly as bad as the mcdonalds coffee woman. Don't say that, because of her there are now warning labels on mc donald coffee cups. Truly a hero of our generation *sarcasm* Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 15:24 susySquark wrote:
Reminds me of the lady who sued MacDonalds because she burned herself with their coffee. Yeah! Fuck her and the frivilous lawsuit that was preceded by more than 700 other burn victims. She was obviously trying to abuse the system and get rich quick. I mean, being 79 years old and all. Show nested quote +Liebeck sought to settle with McDonald's for US $20,000 to cover her medical costs, which were $11,000, but the company offered only $800. I mean really, how bad can a cup of coffee be? Show nested quote +she had suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent.[11] She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. During this period, Liebeck lost 20 pounds (nearly 20% of her body weight), reducing her down to 83 pounds.[12] Two years of medical treatment followed. I love it when people pull out this example, because it is actually a pretty worthwhile lawsuit, rather than a frivolous one.
A worthwhile lawsuit only in that the damage was extensive... and the payout was good. You shouldn't need to be told that a hot drink is hot. The woman suffered at the hands of her own stupidity, and I have a feeling all the warnings about the temperature of the drink in the world wouldn't have prevented what happened.
|
Austin10831 Posts
On November 25 2010 01:46 meeple wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 16:08 Manifesto7 wrote:On November 24 2010 12:44 te3l wrote:On November 24 2010 11:24 jalstar wrote:
This is nearly as bad as the mcdonalds coffee woman. Don't say that, because of her there are now warning labels on mc donald coffee cups. Truly a hero of our generation *sarcasm* On November 24 2010 15:24 susySquark wrote:
Reminds me of the lady who sued MacDonalds because she burned herself with their coffee. Yeah! Fuck her and the frivilous lawsuit that was preceded by more than 700 other burn victims. She was obviously trying to abuse the system and get rich quick. I mean, being 79 years old and all. Liebeck sought to settle with McDonald's for US $20,000 to cover her medical costs, which were $11,000, but the company offered only $800. I mean really, how bad can a cup of coffee be? she had suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent.[11] She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. During this period, Liebeck lost 20 pounds (nearly 20% of her body weight), reducing her down to 83 pounds.[12] Two years of medical treatment followed. I love it when people pull out this example, because it is actually a pretty worthwhile lawsuit, rather than a frivolous one. A worthwhile lawsuit only in that the damage was extensive... and the payout was good. You shouldn't need to be told that a hot drink is hot. The woman suffered at the hands of her own stupidity, and I have a feeling all the warnings about the temperature of the drink in the world wouldn't have prevented what happened.
Again, you mustn't have looked into the case. The problem was never the warnings about the coffee being hot. Everyone knows coffee is hot. The argument was that the coffee was required to be served by McDonald's up to 50° higher than it needed to be, and that in the event of an accident or spill the customer would not have enough time (2 seconds) to remove the coffee from their skin before getting deep-tissue burns.
|
On November 25 2010 01:59 BroOd wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2010 01:46 meeple wrote:On November 24 2010 16:08 Manifesto7 wrote:On November 24 2010 12:44 te3l wrote:On November 24 2010 11:24 jalstar wrote:
This is nearly as bad as the mcdonalds coffee woman. Don't say that, because of her there are now warning labels on mc donald coffee cups. Truly a hero of our generation *sarcasm* On November 24 2010 15:24 susySquark wrote:
Reminds me of the lady who sued MacDonalds because she burned herself with their coffee. Yeah! Fuck her and the frivilous lawsuit that was preceded by more than 700 other burn victims. She was obviously trying to abuse the system and get rich quick. I mean, being 79 years old and all. Liebeck sought to settle with McDonald's for US $20,000 to cover her medical costs, which were $11,000, but the company offered only $800. I mean really, how bad can a cup of coffee be? she had suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent.[11] She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. During this period, Liebeck lost 20 pounds (nearly 20% of her body weight), reducing her down to 83 pounds.[12] Two years of medical treatment followed. I love it when people pull out this example, because it is actually a pretty worthwhile lawsuit, rather than a frivolous one. A worthwhile lawsuit only in that the damage was extensive... and the payout was good. You shouldn't need to be told that a hot drink is hot. The woman suffered at the hands of her own stupidity, and I have a feeling all the warnings about the temperature of the drink in the world wouldn't have prevented what happened. Again, you mustn't have looked into the case. The problem was never the warnings about the coffee being hot. Everyone knows coffee is hot. The argument was that the coffee was required to be served by McDonald's up to 50° higher than it needed to be, and that in the event of an accident or spill the customer would not have enough time (2 seconds) to remove the coffee from their skin before getting deep-tissue burns.
I concede... it was ill-informed spouting...
|
On November 24 2010 08:53 emythrel wrote:
in the UK this drink wouldn't even be considered dangerous lol.
Vodka Redbull anyone? 35% alcohol 100% sugar and caffine
I doubt you can buy 12 vodka redbulls for 5$ though.
|
blaming someone else for your own problems/faults is the way things go in america... just look at all those tobacco industry and mcdonalds lawsuits.
|
On November 25 2010 08:44 decafchicken wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 08:53 emythrel wrote:
in the UK this drink wouldn't even be considered dangerous lol.
Vodka Redbull anyone? 35% alcohol 100% sugar and caffine I doubt you can buy 12 vodka redbulls for 5$ though.
The price isn't why it is supposedly dangerous, though. It's the mixture of stimulant and depressant.
|
Korea (South)1897 Posts
On November 24 2010 08:43 Danzepol wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2010 08:39 mptj wrote:
I think you guys are misunerstanding. He was put on medicine for a condition he doesn't have. I do not think he wants to sue because he got drunk, but rather because the medication and institutions he was put in. Just IMO yes exactly. the root canals are only the begining. I basically lost a year of my life doing nothing but being a vegetable really. And of course that sounds ludicrous, but I do have multiple psychiatrists backing on that point.
I'm not a lawyer, but if you lost a year of your life already, then what have you got to lose? Besides the legal fees, you should explore if other people are suing or make out a facebook page to find others, pool your money together etc and go for it, you couldn't do that shit in Korea, but since you're American and clearly something is wrong with you, and you have the option (possibly) gogo. Let the lawyer worry about the details, but just know, the legal fees could be significant, but why not just troll the internet first for cases like you, if the actual product has gotten banned...and you not suing aint going to stop all the other crazy useless lawsuits out there anyways...gogo!
|
On November 25 2010 01:39 JackMcCoy wrote:
As a former District Attorney for New York County, my first and foremost advice to you, sir, is to stop seeking legal advice from the public. In many cases, the responses you receive may compel you to make your already unfortunate situation worse.
While I can’t offer you any advice on your specific case, I can comment on a hypothetical. Please note that this is in no way an offer of representation and, again, we’re just speaking hypothetically.
If one were to become injured as a result of a combination of intoxication and, as we can see evidence of here in your post, stunning natural mental incapacity, there may be grounds for a suit to be filed. One would have to establish a pattern of willful negligence on the part of the defendants in their obvious disregard for the basic tenets of judicious care and ignorance of foresight with regard to how their actions would negatively affect the offspring.
One would have to argue that the overwhelming ineptitude of the guardians that would result in the child’s tragic lack of common sense or social awareness could have been prevented by standard care, and that the child is not fundamentally flawed by mental deficiency. Should the guardians be able to offer proof of the child’s mental retardation, they would not be expected by a reasonable court to be held responsible for the child’s simple-mindedness.
Personally, I think suing your parents for your own lack judgment or basic common sense is risky, but if you think you can prove that it was their mishandling of your childhood which led you to be this dysfunctional, I wish you the best of luck. If I’ve misunderstood the specifics of this hypothetical, I apologize; I was only commenting on what I could piece together from the fragmented original post.
LOLOLOL. Excellent post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
