"Doug White" wrote in message
...
Keywords:
In article ,
wrote:
snip
Frivolous tort lawsuits, like the McDonald's hot coffee fiasco, don't
fly in the UK.

We get a few. I can't bring one as frivolous as the hot coffee affair to
mind, though.
snip
By itself it appears this was a frivolous suit. However taken in
total as the latest in a series of accidents involving [too] hot
coffee, the verdict was justified, i.e. you are only allowed to
injure only so many people with your "safe" product before it
costs you. snip

That doesn't explain the guy and his suit against the lawn mower company.
He lost his fingers when he picked up a running mower by the edges of
the deck to try to trim his hedge.

The biggest problem is that there is no longer any such thing as personal
reponsibility, and any time anything bad happens, it must be someone's
else's fault, preferably someone you can sue. The lawyers are largely
responsible for this attitude, because they make lots of money this way.
It's gotten to the point where parents are suing schools because little
Johnnie's grades aren't up to snuff. I think there are definitely
companies that need to be taken to task for irresponsible behavior, but
the attitude of most folks is that selling ANY product is irresponsible
in some fashion if it doesn't suit their fancy, or if they've found a new
& dangerous way to abuse it. The government tends to support this by
trying to regulate safety to a fare-thee-well. I work in the defense
industry, and folks are now having all sorts of meetings to make sure
that there will be no lead used in the next generation of our nuclear
missiles. Excuse me!!???

The next time you take an aspirin, thank the diety of your choice that
the stuff came on the market before all of the drug testing laws got put
on the books.

Doug White

You're right about stupid Americans suing for just about any damn thing
regardless of whether they were to blame for the damage in the first place.
Just look at the families of the miners who died in Virginia. They were told
erroneously that their family members were rescued alive only to find out
hours later the announcement was wrong. What was their response to finding
out the information they first received about the miners was wrong? You
guessed it, they were going to sue. Can you imagine that? They got some
wrong information and they want to sue. I wonder how they're going to figure
out how much the mine owners owe them for misinforming them about the fate
of the miners? Let's see, my feelings were hurt very badly. I think about
$500,000 ought to cover it.

This case is a good example of the problem with frivolous lawsuits. You need
goofy plaintiffs to have one. The lawyers don't start these cases on their
own. It's the people that come to them asking them to sue that are the
problem, not the attorneys. I think that's worth remembering next time you
hear about a frivolous lawsuit. The plaintiff is at fault every bit as much
as the attorney, more if you ask me.

Hawke