Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Bodhi on May 24, 2007, 06:08:55 PM
-
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2881602
It always makes me sick to see these types of lawsuits coming out. Flat out, the guy made his own choice to get trashed than drive. That is not the responsibility of anyone else but he. Freaking attorneys.
-
I agree. Nobody made him drink. They didn't hold a gun to his head and say drink this. It was his choice to get smashed and it was his choice to drive drunk.
-
Lawsuits like this are motivated by greed imo. The man chose to drink, chose to drive, chose to talk on a cellphone while driving.....all bad choices on his part.
-
Back when I was a bartender, this sort of litigation was the type we always worried about.
Despite all the great "bar" movies and tv shows, the ugly side of bartending is dealing with a public that will shun any level of responsibility for their actions
-
Originally posted by LePaul
..... is dealing with a public that will shun any level of responsibility for their actions
but...but...but... this is America! We aren't responsible for our own actions here! There is always someone else we can blame, and probably sue, for everything!
The new American Dream: Sue someone and get rich doing it.
-
That greedy bastard is suing the guy that had the stalled car. What a freaking complete and total scumbag. Hope someone makes an example out of him with a ball bat
Other defendants Justin Tolar, the driver whose stalled car on Interstate 64 was being assisted by Hargrove (Hangrove was the wrecker driver).
-
Total greedy ****ing dirt bag scum.
The car owner should be suing them.
-
What's really sad? This kind of case has legal precedent. A lot of legal precedent.
He'll win the law suit.
-
So it's the guys fault with the stalled car and not the goofball that was driving while intoxicated? Unbelievable....
-
Originally posted by Elfie
So it's the guys fault with the stalled car and not the goofball that was driving while intoxicated? Unbelievable....
Actually, it seems to be everyone's fault from the bartender, to the stalled driver, to the tow truck operator,... the list will undoubtedly grow.
Blameless is the dead guy who was drunk behind the wheel and on the cell phone, and the parents that raised him and are now filing suit since their easy paycheck got hisself kilt.
The lawyers will win.
-
Win the case or not, the lawyers will be paid handsomely.
-
Dram shop law in Michigan does not allow the drunk driver to sue the bar for damages, seems like a simple fix, change the law.
shamus
-
Scary world we live in where you can get sued by a drunk driver because your car broke down.:rolleyes:
-
The one who needs to be sued is the stupid father for raising such an idiotic son.
-
I don't have time to read the transcript/article - can't the other guy counter-sue?
-
something like 80% or better of lawyers vote democrat. Why do you suppose that is?
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
something like 80% or better of lawyers vote democrat. Why do you suppose that is?
lazs
Because they are smart and highly educated?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Because they are smart and highly educated?
Because their Weasels?
-
I am sure that is it MT...
It is easy to see the result of what smart people do too. I think we would all agree that we don't have enough lawyers and that they all make our lives so much better.
Have you hugged a lawyer today?
lazs
-
John Edwards is/was a lawyer, he made a $60 million fortune suing doctors.
you can thank him for helping to make your health insurance premiums high.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
something like 80% or better of lawyers vote democrat. Why do you suppose that is?
lazs
Yay!!! Laz is here to shoehorn in his anti-Democrat rants into an unrelated thread. :aok
-
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by lazs2
something like 80% or better of lawyers vote democrat. Why do you suppose that is?
lazs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yay!!! Laz is here to shoehorn in his anti-Democrat rants into an unrelated thread.
__________________
Mickey
anti-democratic rant? it sounds like a statement followed by a question.
-
I hope the judge has at least 1 functioning brain cell and tosses this right of the court room. The only person to break any law in this case is the idiot who got killed.
-
Right and wrong does not matter. Often the judge doesn't matter either. Case in point:
Man in Alabama gets drunk, blood alcohol level of 0.21, more than double the legal limit. Drives his small SUV, without a seatbelt, at speeds in excess of 40MPH over the posted limits (25MPH is wreckless driving by law) on the Interstate. Loses control, at nearly 90MPH, flips in the median a dozen times, and is ejected from the vehicle (not wearing a seatbelt), survives, is paralyzed, and sues the manufacturer of the SUV. Jury awards $85,000,000. Jury says that even though the plaintiff was drunk, speeding, and not wearing his seat belt, the door should not have come open on the vehicle after it had rolled the first 6 times at near 90MPH.
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Right and wrong does not matter. Often the judge doesn't matter either. Case in point:
Man in Alabama gets drunk, blood alcohol level of 0.21, more than double the legal limit. Drives his small SUV, without a seatbelt, at speeds in excess of 40MPH over the posted limits (25MPH is wreckless driving by law) on the Interstate. Loses control, at nearly 90MPH, flips in the median a dozen times, and is ejected from the vehicle (not wearing a seatbelt), survives, is paralyzed, and sues the manufacturer of the SUV. Jury awards $85,000,000. Jury says that even though the plaintiff was drunk, speeding, and not wearing his seat belt, the door should not have come open on the vehicle after it had rolled the first 6 times at near 90MPH.
Just shows what a screwed up world we live in
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
What's really sad? This kind of case has legal precedent. A lot of legal precedent.
He'll win the law suit.
Laser is probably right.
Bars have been sued before by victims of drunk drivers. It's not a stretch to think that if a bar can be held responsible for the victims of a drunk driver, a bar can be held responsible for the death of a drunk driver.
I don't see Hancock winning anything from the towing company, the tow driver, or owner of the stalled car. That's just asinine.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
something like 80% or better of lawyers vote democrat. Why do you suppose that is?
lazs
Lawyers vote democratic because the democrats have always opposed tort reform on exactly these types of issues. Any lawyer that realises that his paychecks could be severly curtailed over any type of tort reform is obviously not going to vote for someone that has the common sense to realise and push forth legislation that is designed to stop these stupid and frivolous lawsuits.
-
LMFAO!!!!!!
Did you guys' read the quote in Virgil's post?
The one in which the drunk 'tard driving the SUV like he was in the Firecracker 400?
You all blamed the attorney's for this.
What about the 12 people sitting in the jury box? THEY are the ones who decided to let this fly. The trial attorney doesn't have a vote when they go in the back room. Those 12 are supposed to sit and deliberate, and decide if the guy deserves it or not, After having had the benefit of listening to the whole f---ing trial. The culprit in this case, isn't the attorney. It's the 12 handsomehunkes' that let this fly.
-
Originally posted by FrodeMk3
LMFAO!!!!!!
Did you guys' read the quote in Virgil's post?
The one in which the drunk 'tard driving the SUV like he was in the Firecracker 400?
You all blamed the attorney's for this.
What about the 12 people sitting in the jury box? THEY are the ones who decided to let this fly. The trial attorney doesn't have a vote when they go in the back room. Those 12 are supposed to sit and deliberate, and decide if the guy deserves it or not, After having had the benefit of listening to the whole f---ing trial. The culprit in this case, isn't the attorney. It's the 12 handsomehunkes' that let this fly.
Not just the 12 in the jury box (and I find myself insulted at being judged by 12 so-called "peers" who ain't bright enough to get themselves out of jury duty, but I digress...), it's also the Judge. Most judge's in most states have the ability to toss out frivolous cases.... just very few of them exercise this ability to the benefit of the legal system. Better to hear everything and let the court system back up like an old septic tank.
As to the 12 in the jury box, they are part of a society who are being brought up to believe that everything trumps personal responsibility and all things big industry are evil. Auto manufacturer vs idiot scumbag? Scumbag wins. Better than the lottery.
If you like this kind of thing though, check out The Stella Awards (http://www.stellaawards.com/2006.html) .
Stuff like that had me rooting for a Y2K collapse so I could go out and shoot me some legal beagles.
-
Originally posted by tedrbr
If you like this kind of thing though, check out The Stella Awards (http://www.stellaawards.com/2006.html) .
Stuff like that had me rooting for a Y2K collapse so I could go out and shoot me some legal beagles.
I read it. A small piece of my soul died.
Tedrbr, I'm gonna sue you for a billion dollars now.
-
"That's the mall's fault, the lawsuit claims, demanding in excess of $50,000, based on the mall's "failure to warn" her that squirrels live outside."
Squirrels live outside?!?!:O I never knew that! Thank God the mall warned me. I had nooooo idea.
-
Originally posted by tedrbr
Actually, it seems to be everyone's fault from the bartender, to the stalled driver, to the tow truck operator,... the list will undoubtedly grow.
Blameless is the dead guy who was drunk behind the wheel and on the cell phone, and the parents that raised him and are now filing suit since their easy paycheck got hisself kilt.
The lawyers will win.
My father and I have been talking about Court Case battlefield Tactics. My idea is this:
Anytime you are sued, immediately counter sue for double the amount. Be twice as nasty to anyone who is trying to screw you.
I think it could work.
-
lazer.. the lawyers would love it.
bohdi.. that was exactly my point. Democrats give the lawyers what they want and make sure that they can operate as they do.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
My father and I have been talking about Court Case battlefield Tactics. My idea is this:
Anytime you are sued, immediately counter sue for double the amount. Be twice as nasty to anyone who is trying to screw you.
I think it could work.
I prefer to play by Baghdad rules: Grab the plaintiff and his lawyer. 1 shot each in the head. Dump into nearby river. Problem solved.
If caught I can blame it on being a war-vet (although the Army will just claim it's a pre-existing condition).