MAFCA lawsuit question

Status
Not open for further replies.
MarkR said:
Here's the facts on the McDonalds hot coffee case, just to put the frivolous lawsuit theory to bed.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm

Still think it's ridiculous?
Click to expand...

Also note that Micky D no longer uses styrofoam cups, but a more rigid paper cup with a lid that does not have to be taken off to consume, asks you if you want them to put cream/sugar in it before they give it to you, and has reduced the temprature. All as a result of this (and I'm sure others)
 
newshirt said:
Judges, juries, lawyers, and ordinary citizens can no longer discern truth from untruth or wrong from right. And, a growing segment of society say there are no absolute "rights" and "wrongs." That every "truth" is relative to every situation and individual.
Click to expand...


Those of us to live our lives strictly by a certain bestseller DO still know absolute right from absolute wrong. As fewer and fewer people read and follow that book, there is more and more gray area between right and wrong, or blurring of them both completely. The last chapter of that book spells it out pretty clearly.
 
visionary said:
The problem is a large portion of the legislators are lawyers.

There is a local flower shop that was sued by a guy that came to buy flowers for his wife, after making his flower purchase, drove home a good 15 to 20 miles from the flower shop and upon pulling into his driveway got out to check his mailbox, and sprained his ankle in a pothole in his own driveway? the argument was that if he had not gone to the flower shop this wouldn't have happened, WTF the flower shop owner was pressured into paying an out of court settlement for $10,000 plus several thousand for his own attorney fees. he was advised to do this as the cheapest way out.
Click to expand...

The flower shops attorney needs to wake up and smell the roses.
 
Remember the woman that bought hot coffee, placed it between her legs while driving and won money because it was hot and burned her?[/QUOTE]


In her defense, she had 3rd degree burns over her entire legs and lady areas, required skin graphs and almost died. She deserved every penny. I had to do a research project over this and other law suites so that's how I know this information.
 
A recent article in our paper concerned DUII cases. The county prosecutor bragged that he had gotten convictions on drivers with half the legal blood alcohol level. A defense attorney countered that he had gotten an acquittal for a guy caught driving with 5 times the legal alcohol limit. He also commented on the relative malleability of evidence and the gullibility of juries.
 
I was a fence contractor for 25 years, i built a baseball backstop for a family fun park. some one hit a foul ball over the backstop and broke a ladies nose she sued the owner of the park,the guy who hit the ball,and me, my insurance paid! go figure ?
 
Don't you thnk the members of the organization should know about the lawsuit if it will significally impact them?

I have always seen that lawyers are the low life of society..... UNTIL you need one!! :)
​
PS- There is a lot of traffic on here tonight because the snow is really coming down in many parts of the east.​
 
P.S. said:
Those of us to live our lives strictly by a certain bestseller DO still know absolute right from absolute wrong. As fewer and fewer people read and follow that book, there is more and more gray area between right and wrong, or blurring of them both completely. The last chapter of that book spells it out pretty clearly.
Click to expand...

Whether you say "Bible" or don't say "Bible" it's still a religious comment and doesn't belong here. Bad enough that we have to talk about lawyers! It would be really nice if every single thing in life was either black or white, but the reality is that most things we have to deal with are in shades of gray. And, not everyone sees the same color from the same viewpoint.
 
MAFCA'S insurance company recently paid out a large amount of cash to be released from this lawsuit. The family members of Mr. Speer are the plaintiffs in this lawsuit. One of the causes of action was, that the old cars distracted the driver of the truck which rear ended a stoped car (waiting to make a left turn) which inturn hit Mr. Speers car head on. Mr. Speers was just driving along with in a group of Model A's. This all happened two cars behind me.
 
Jordan said:
Remember the woman that bought hot coffee, placed it between her legs while driving and won money because it was hot and burned her?
Click to expand...

In her defense, she had 3rd degree burns over her entire legs and lady areas, required skin graphs and almost died. She deserved every penny. I had to do a research project over this and other law suites so that's how I know this information.[/QUOTE]

I have little love for McDonald's but really, who would put a flexible cup holding scalding liquid between their knees? At some point, you have to assume responsibility for your own personal stupidity. Plus where was the other guy in the car-why didn't he tell her that was dangerous, offer to help,something?
 
Several issues seem to have arisen as I followed the thread on this topic:

First, I read into Greg's initial inquiry both a request for more information, as well as a possible feeling that a more comprehensive explanation should have accompanied these remarks concerning the pending litigation;
Second, I'm not clear as to which party is suing MAFCA, presumably it is the late Mr. Speer's family, which might in turn give some indication as to an appropriate response to the next question;
Third, depending on the Plaintiff's theory of liability, it would be interesting to learn what standard of care was alleged to have been breached and why was this purported "liability" then assigned to MAFCA and to what degree?
This indirectly then raises the question of "What types of incidents does the national policy cover?" Ultimately, all of these questions beg the real question of "What are the the potential consequences to both national clubs' ability to continue to offer effective and affordable insurance coverages to their respective memberships?

That said, I also share in Mark's statements above that any Plaintiff's lawyer has a duty and a professional responsibility to fully prosecute all potential remedies available to his client - we would each expect nothing less of any agent that we might engage to represent our interest on any given matter. As a "recovering lawyer" myself, I have an appreciation for both sides of this issue. But perhaps what we should be concerned about in all of this (other than concern for Mr. Speer's family), are the broader questions that surround the two national clubs' abilities to provide effective insurance coverages for their respective memberships. I suspect that as our culture grows more litigious, it will be harder and more expensive to be able to offer comprehensive insurance coverages at prices that non-profit groups and clubs are able to justify. Just my "two cents" - I welcome yours as well.

Thanks --

Dick
 
It's difficult to see how anyone other that the man in the F-250 is at fault. it's unlear how MAFCA could be even construed to be liable. Might as well also sue the DMV for issuing Mr Speer a driver's license and the Department of Highways for building a road. Honestly.

"Investigators say 62-year-old Mariposa resident William Ashworth then approached from the east in a 2005 Ford F-250 pickup truck. For unknown reasons, Mr. Ashworth struck Ms. Brandon’s vehicle from behind, forcing it into the path of oncoming traffic where it struck the vintage Model A."
 
Chuck Sea/Tac said:
.................So I was told by a female attorney, when I whined about me not being able to sue the jackass doctor who missed diagnosis me dying off an internal staff infection. (He thought it was gout). Chuck
Click to expand...

Ah I'm a Doctor and diagnosis is not as easy as you think. While I know nothing of your case I can tell you the clincial presentation of Gout and A Staph Infection can be very simaler at least in the early stages.

Why I agree people should be accountable for there mistakes we are only human and we all make mistakes. The issue I have is that accountability seems to be so often fiscal. Every complainent says they just want to stop it happening again to some one else and getting a big fat check from some one is surposed to achieve that . Lets be honest its often just about the money .

Fortunately I practice in a country where it is relatively unusual for Doctors to be sued probably because lawyers are not allowed to operate on a percentage of any settlement basis . Makes my life more pleasant , Makes my patients fees much more managable (as I don't have to cover huge malpractice insurance payments) and in my personal experience doesn't make us any worse Doctors than our international colleagues.

They does however exist many complaint streams for the patient and a thorough and rigorous investigation process but the penalities tend to focus on trulely preventing a repeat mistake ie extra training supervsion etc etc Thankfully after 25 years of practice I have yet to experience the process (touch wood)

Karl
 
5window said:
It's difficult to see how anyone other that the man in the F-250 is at fault. it's unlear how MAFCA could be even construed to be liable. Might as well also sue the DMV for issuing Mr Speer a driver's license and the Department of Highways for building a road. Honestly.

"Investigators say 62-year-old Mariposa resident William Ashworth then approached from the east in a 2005 Ford F-250 pickup truck. For unknown reasons, Mr. Ashworth struck Ms. Brandon’s vehicle from behind, forcing it into the path of oncoming traffic where it struck the vintage Model A."
Click to expand...

California laws are very "plaintiff friendly" and it's common to chase links to deep pockets to fill the financial void at other levels. It's not unusual to see some pretty crazy "wins".

Secondly, insurance companies always weigh the odds of winning versus the actual costs of going to court. Even if they have a 99% chance of winning there is a serious cost involved in following through assuming they can't get it thrown out. If they can settle for a number less than the cost of fighting it they often will do so and then pass the cost onto the insured party through premiums. They have no obligation to fight on the behalf of the insured.

It's sad that the legal system allows for that including cases bordering on extortion but that is the way the game is played and everyone in "the system" knows it.
 
"In her defense, she had 3rd degree burns over her entire legs and lady areas, required skin graphs and almost died."

This is the biggest load of bull I have heard in a long time.Third degree means the burns are all the way down to muscle. So now one cup of coffee is enough to strip her entire legs down to muscle, and not a drop made it to the upholstery? Underneath the skin, especially on women, there are several layers of fat that would have to go first. Sounds like typical internet research.
 
tbirdtbird said:
"In her defense, she had 3rd degree burns over her entire legs and lady areas, required skin graphs and almost died."

This is the biggest load of bull I have heard in a long time.Third degree means the burns are all the way down to muscle. So now one cup of coffee is enough to strip her entire legs down to muscle, and not a drop made it to the upholstery? Underneath the skin, especially on women, there are several layers of fat that would have to go first. Sounds like typical internet research.
Click to expand...

Actually Third degree means completely through the dermis ie full thickness skin -Fat and other connective tissue between that and the muscle need not (but can ) be involved -Karl
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top