Woman Sues Google For Bad Directions
Another ridiculous lawsuit, from a seemingly stupid person.
Active Ink Slinger
Join the best erotica focused adult social network now
Login
Woman Sues Google For Bad Directions
There are awards for people who sue/try to sue for stupid reasons
True Stella Awards
#7: Bob Dougherty. A prankster smeared glue on the toilet seat at the Home Depot store in Louisville, Colo., causing Dougherty to stick to it when he sat down. "This is not Home Depot's fault," he proclaimed, yet the store graciously offered him $2,000 anyway. Dougherty complained the offer is "insulting" and filed suit demanding $3 million.
#6: Barbara Connors of Medfield, Mass. Connors was riding in a car driven by her 70-year-old(!) son-in-law when they crashed into the Connecticut River, and Connors sank with the car. Rescue divers arrived within minutes and got her out alive, but Connors suffered brain damage from her near-drowning. Sue the driver? Sure, we guess that's reasonable. But she also sued the brave rescue workers who risked their lives to save hers.
#5: Michelle Knepper of Vancouver, Wash. Knepper picked a doctor out of the phone book to do her liposuction, and went ahead with the procedure even though the doctor was only a dermatologist, not a plastic surgeon. After having complications, she complained she never would have chosen that doctor had she known he wasn't Board Certified in the procedure. (She relied on the phonebook listing over asking the doctor, or looking for a certificate on his wall?!) So she sued ...the phone company! She won $1.2 million plus $375,000 for her husband for "loss of spousal services and companionship."
#4: Rhonda Nichols. She says a wild bird "attacked" her outside a home improvement store in Fairview Heights, Ill., causing head injuries. That's right: outside the store. Yet Nichols still held the Lowe's store responsible for "allowing" wild birds to fly around free in the air. She never reported the incident to the store, but still sued for "at least" $100,000 in damages. In January 2006, the case was thrown out of court.
#3: Barnard Lorence of Stuart, Fla. Lorence managed to overdraw his own bank account. When the bank charged him a service fee for the overdraft, he filed suit over his "stress and pain" and loss of sleep over the fee. A few hundred thousand bucks, he says, will only amount to a "slap on the wrist", whereas the $2 million he's suing for is more like being "paddled". Kinky!
#2: Wanita "Renea" Young of Durango, Colo. Two neighborhood teens baked cookies for their neighbors as an anonymous gesture of good will, but Young got scared when she heard them on her front porch. They apologized, in writing, but Young sued them anyway for causing her distress, demanding $3,000. When she won(!!) $900, she crowed about it in the newspaper and on national TV. Now, she's shocked (shocked!) that everyone in town hates her for her spite, and is afraid she may have to move. But hey: she won.
And the winner of the 2005 True Stella Award: Christopher Roller of Burnsville, Minn. Roller is mystified by professional magicians, so he sued David Blaine and David Copperfield to demand they reveal their secrets to him -- or else pay him 10 percent of their lifelong earnings, which he figures amounts to $50 million for Copperfield and $2 million for Blaine. The basis for his suit: Roller claims that the magicians defy the laws of physics, and thus must be using "godly powers" -- and since Roller is god (according to him), they're "somehow" stealing that power from him.
True Stella Awards
#7: Bob Dougherty. A prankster smeared glue on the toilet seat at the Home Depot store in Louisville, Colo., causing Dougherty to stick to it when he sat down. "This is not Home Depot's fault," he proclaimed, yet the store graciously offered him $2,000 anyway. Dougherty complained the offer is "insulting" and filed suit demanding $3 million.
#6: Barbara Connors of Medfield, Mass. Connors was riding in a car driven by her 70-year-old(!) son-in-law when they crashed into the Connecticut River, and Connors sank with the car. Rescue divers arrived within minutes and got her out alive, but Connors suffered brain damage from her near-drowning. Sue the driver? Sure, we guess that's reasonable. But she also sued the brave rescue workers who risked their lives to save hers.
#5: Michelle Knepper of Vancouver, Wash. Knepper picked a doctor out of the phone book to do her liposuction, and went ahead with the procedure even though the doctor was only a dermatologist, not a plastic surgeon. After having complications, she complained she never would have chosen that doctor had she known he wasn't Board Certified in the procedure. (She relied on the phonebook listing over asking the doctor, or looking for a certificate on his wall?!) So she sued ...the phone company! She won $1.2 million plus $375,000 for her husband for "loss of spousal services and companionship."
#4: Rhonda Nichols. She says a wild bird "attacked" her outside a home improvement store in Fairview Heights, Ill., causing head injuries. That's right: outside the store. Yet Nichols still held the Lowe's store responsible for "allowing" wild birds to fly around free in the air. She never reported the incident to the store, but still sued for "at least" $100,000 in damages. In January 2006, the case was thrown out of court.
#3: Barnard Lorence of Stuart, Fla. Lorence managed to overdraw his own bank account. When the bank charged him a service fee for the overdraft, he filed suit over his "stress and pain" and loss of sleep over the fee. A few hundred thousand bucks, he says, will only amount to a "slap on the wrist", whereas the $2 million he's suing for is more like being "paddled". Kinky!
#2: Wanita "Renea" Young of Durango, Colo. Two neighborhood teens baked cookies for their neighbors as an anonymous gesture of good will, but Young got scared when she heard them on her front porch. They apologized, in writing, but Young sued them anyway for causing her distress, demanding $3,000. When she won(!!) $900, she crowed about it in the newspaper and on national TV. Now, she's shocked (shocked!) that everyone in town hates her for her spite, and is afraid she may have to move. But hey: she won.
And the winner of the 2005 True Stella Award: Christopher Roller of Burnsville, Minn. Roller is mystified by professional magicians, so he sued David Blaine and David Copperfield to demand they reveal their secrets to him -- or else pay him 10 percent of their lifelong earnings, which he figures amounts to $50 million for Copperfield and $2 million for Blaine. The basis for his suit: Roller claims that the magicians defy the laws of physics, and thus must be using "godly powers" -- and since Roller is god (according to him), they're "somehow" stealing that power from him.
Quote by Loislane
#4: Rhonda Nichols. She says a wild bird "attacked" her outside a home improvement store in Fairview Heights, Ill., causing head injuries. That's right: outside the store. Yet Nichols still held the Lowe's store responsible for "allowing" wild birds to fly around free in the air. She never reported the incident to the store, but still sued for "at least" $100,000 in damages. In January 2006, the case was thrown out of court.
Now this so called lawsuit is roughly 30 minutes from my driveway. Yes the case was thrown out, but the lawyers for the home improvement store re-filled a lawsuit against Ms. Nichols. The lawyers have filled a suit that states, "For a waste of our time" have counter-suit for $1,000,000. This case is pending.
Quote by Charlie_BrownQuote by Loislane
#4: Rhonda Nichols. She says a wild bird "attacked" her outside a home improvement store in Fairview Heights, Ill., causing head injuries. That's right: outside the store. Yet Nichols still held the Lowe's store responsible for "allowing" wild birds to fly around free in the air. She never reported the incident to the store, but still sued for "at least" $100,000 in damages. In January 2006, the case was thrown out of court.
Now this so called lawsuit is roughly 30 minutes from my driveway. Yes the case was thrown out, but the lawyers for the home improvement store re-filled a lawsuit against Ms. Nichols. The lawyers have filled a suit that states, "For a waste of our time" have counter-suit for $1,000,000. This case is pending.
(laugs) people are nuts
Active Ink Slinger
Are these people serious or are they just creating get rich quick schemes?
Active Ink Slinger
People have nothing else better to do with their time.
www.szadvntures.com
Latest story:
TBD
Bump in the Night-Microfiction
Smoke Break-Interracial
Active Ink Slinger
We should start sueing these people for their stupid lawsuits, for bogging down our already overwhelmed justice system. It costs me tax dollars and eats away at the fabric of our society. I mean... since we can't shoot them. *lol*
paranormal • erotic • romance
www.forlorn-hope.net
Quote by chefkathleen
I still laugh about the McDonalds v. dumbwoman case. The coffee burnt her? Really? It was hot? Wow!
OR the man that sued Wendy's? for his wife getting burnt lips from hot pickles on her burger and therefore he couldn't kiss her. Or whatever the hell it was.
Yeah always loved that one bout the old lady burning herself with coffee HELL IT"S CALLED HOT COFFEE FOR A REASON YOU FUCKING IDIOT!!!!! LMAO
Some people are just to freakin stupid.
Smiley Guru
Quote by bikebum1975Quote by chefkathleen
I still laugh about the McDonalds v. dumbwoman case. The coffee burnt her? Really? It was hot? Wow!
OR the man that sued Wendy's? for his wife getting burnt lips from hot pickles on her burger and therefore he couldn't kiss her. Or whatever the hell it was.
Yeah always loved that one bout the old lady burning herself with coffee HELL IT"S CALLED HOT COFFEE FOR A REASON YOU FUCKING IDIOT!!!!! LMAO
Some people are just to freakin stupid.
I read recently that in the Mc Donalds Hot Coffee case the woman was actually badly burned and was suing for her medical bills (including skin grafts). The JURY decided that since it was shown that McD's had been cited by health inspectors repeatedly for the temperature of their coffee (180 degrees F) and had ignored these they would send a message with a punitative damages. McD's kept the coffee so extremely hot because they continue to sell it long after it should have been thrown out.
Do you all remember how McD's coffee used to be? You would fry your mouth on the first sip so you couldn't even taste how shitty the coffee really was.
I kind of like the irony of McDonalds trying to paint themselves as a seller of gourmet coffee. To me those ads are an instant "fail" with a supersize of "facepalm" everytime I see one.
Quote by PlaymaleQuote by bikebum1975Quote by chefkathleen
I still laugh about the McDonalds v. dumbwoman case. The coffee burnt her? Really? It was hot? Wow!
OR the man that sued Wendy's? for his wife getting burnt lips from hot pickles on her burger and therefore he couldn't kiss her. Or whatever the hell it was.
Yeah always loved that one bout the old lady burning herself with coffee HELL IT"S CALLED HOT COFFEE FOR A REASON YOU FUCKING IDIOT!!!!! LMAO
Some people are just to freakin stupid.
I read recently that in the Mc Donalds Hot Coffee case the woman was actually badly burned and was suing for her medical bills (including skin grafts). The JURY decided that since it was shown that McD's had been cited by health inspectors repeatedly for the temperature of their coffee (180 degrees F) and had ignored these they would send a message with a punitative damages. McD's kept the coffee so extremely hot because they continue to sell it long after it should have been thrown out.
Do you all remember how McD's coffee used to be? You would fry your mouth on the first sip so you couldn't even taste how shitty the coffee really was.
I kind of like the irony of McDonalds trying to paint themselves as a seller of gourmet coffee. To me those ads are an instant "fail" with a supersize of "facepalm" everytime I see one.
Shit hell only a 180 degree? Crap I've been burned by shit hotter than that man and I've never sued anyone this damn country over the past number of years has become to fucking sue happy. Hell I spilled coffee on myself shit think everyone has at one point or another. Been burned on my mouth by hot cheese from eating a slice of pizza so what now do I go sue the pizza maker cause I was to dumb to know not to eat it that second out of the oven? Hell no. But hey that's just me.
>A Utah woman walked into the middle of a highway and was hit by a car.
>Utah woman walked into the middle of a highway
>Utah woman
Ah. I think I found the problem here.
Thousands of user submitted stories removed from the site. You are nothing without your users or their freely submitted stories.
Smiley Guru
Quote by bikebum1975
Shit hell only a 180 degree? Crap I've been burned by shit hotter than that man and I've never sued anyone this damn country over the past number of years has become to fucking sue happy. Hell I spilled coffee on myself shit think everyone has at one point or another. Been burned on my mouth by hot cheese from eating a slice of pizza so what now do I go sue the pizza maker cause I was to dumb to know not to eat it that second out of the oven? Hell no. But hey that's just me.
I understand your point completely Bike and I'm with you people need to be resposible for their own actions and accept the dangers of the world we live in, but to give you an idea of the burns she sustained I found this...
"There is a lot of hype about the McDonalds' scalding coffee case. No one is in favor of frivolous cases of outlandish results; however, it is important to understand some points that were not reported in most of the stories about the case. McDonalds coffee was not only hot, it was scalding -- capable of almost instantaneous destruction of skin, flesh and muscle...
Stella Liebeck ...79 at the time, ordered coffee that was served in a styrofoam cup at the drivethrough window of a local McDonalds.
After receiving the order, the grandson pulled his car forward and stopped momentarily so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. (Critics of civil justice, who have pounced on this case, often charge that Liebeck was driving the car or that the vehicle was in motion when she spilled the coffee; neither is true.) Liebeck placed the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the plastic lid from the cup. As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap.
The sweatpants Liebeck was wearing absorbed the coffee and held it next to her skin. A vascular surgeon determined that Liebeck suffered full thickness burns (or third-degree burns) over 6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and genital and groin areas. She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting. Liebeck, who also underwent debridement treatments, sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonalds refused.
During discovery, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks. This history documented McDonalds' knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard."
This is where I found these facts about the McDonalds Coffee case. (it's an interesting read)
I've been burned by stuff way hotter than 180 degrees too, however when a hot substance remains in contact with the skin it continues to transfer heat. I've never had my inner thighs, perineum. buttocks, and gential and groin area scalded to the point anything needed grafting, but I beleive if I had I'd be mad as hell.
There is also the idea we need to consider that in our legal system this case is presented before 12 impartial jurors. They hear the facts presented, and an impartial Judge presides. They are exposed to a lot more information than we get through the often wrong newspapers. We need to realize that this system is in place to offer us method to right wrongs against us, to settle disputes peacefully. When somone has been through it and wins we need to realize that apparently the case has merit.
On another note, the Lawyers and Barr Association have hijacked the process so that you have to pay them so much to participate it is prohibiive to bring a lawsuit, with deep pocket corporations able to stifle even legitimate cases.
I agree there are a lot of pointless and opportunistic lawsuits. I think that bringing a frivolous lawsuit should be considered criminal fraud or extortion and be prosecuteed by the state, but sometimes we don't know it's frivolous until the facts begin to be revealed.
Now, I think we should all have a nice hot cuppa joe!
I'll just go google for directions!
I still say it wasn't Mac's fault I mean after all it's always been known as a CUP OF HOT COFFEE for a reason people and I still don't buy that it could have done that kind of damage to her. Shit I have been burnt by a freakin cast iron wood stove before and been burnt by soldering irons to never had any problems after from it. Just sayin ok off rant.
Smiley Guru
Maybe it would have been better if she sued for the quality of their coffee. That shit used to be really bad.
Quote by Playmale
Maybe it would have been better if she sued for the quality of their coffee. That shit used to be really bad.
It's actually pretty good these days I guess hard to get a bad cup of coffee really today when you think bout it. Personally me not so crazy bout that Starbucks shit lmao.
Active Ink Slinger
Quote by bikebum1975
I still say it wasn't Mac's fault I mean after all it's always been known as a CUP OF HOT COFFEE for a reason people and I still don't buy that it could have done that kind of damage to her. Shit I have been burnt by a freakin cast iron wood stove before and been burnt by soldering irons to never had any problems after from it. Just sayin ok off rant.
Me too. The fault lies with the stupid woman taking the safety lid off. If you read the deposition, the lid says "contents may be hot"... she took it off while she was driving... this to me is someone who is too stupid to be allowed to wander freely in society. She had no one to blame but herself. The coffee was hot enought o scald badly... thus the warning and safety lid.
The makers of blow dryers put a warning label on them... but are they to blame that they are made with enough voltage to kill you, if you turn one on in the shower? No... the idiot who ignored the warning is. IMHO. Hehehe...
If I ever hit the lottery, I will begin a hobby of monitoring lawsuits. Anytime one in my region is stupid like this... I will sue the plaintiff for wasting tax payers dollars and clogging the courts. Hehehe. Tit for tat, per se.
paranormal • erotic • romance
www.forlorn-hope.net
Smiley Guru
Quote by BrindleChase
If you read the deposition, the lid says "contents may be hot"... she took it off while she was driving... this to me is someone who is too stupid to be allowed to wander freely in society. She had no one to blame but herself.
If I ever hit the lottery, I will begin a hobby of monitoring lawsuits. Anytime one in my region is stupid like this... I will sue the plaintiff for wasting tax payers dollars and clogging the courts. Hehehe. Tit for tat, per se.
Actually she wasn't driving, her grandson was and he had stopped so she could add cream etc.
There is a point here that 150-155 degrees is a safer, more comon, and more reasonable temperature for a hot drink than 180 degrees. McDonalds had hundreds of complaints and cases similar to this that they had ignored, including similar injuries.
Here is a scale that shows temperature vs time to 3rd degree burn. (found it here)
In other words serving a drink that can deliver a full thickness burn (3rd degree) in a tenth of a second is irresponsible compared to serving one that takes a whole whopping 2 seconds to scald to a 3rd degree burn. That 1.5-2 extra seconds gives even a slow 79 y.o. person a chance to react and lessen the severity of the burn.
She didn't sue because they sold her coffee, or because she spilled it. She sued over their practice of keeping and serving it dangerously hot, which combined with a simple spill (we've all done it) had a severe effect.
I can't stand baseless lawsuits, but that is why we have judges decide if they will go to trial and juries to hear them. I simply don't believe this was a baseless lawsuit.
There were apparently 12 jurors who felt the same way and found that she had a reasonable grievance, and that a punitave damages large enough to send a message to a corporate giant was in order.
This 79 year old dumbass took on McDonalds in court, and won, they've changed their practice. That's a David and Goliath story and an accomplishment.
Quote by PlaymaleQuote by BrindleChase
If you read the deposition, the lid says "contents may be hot"... she took it off while she was driving... this to me is someone who is too stupid to be allowed to wander freely in society. She had no one to blame but herself.
If I ever hit the lottery, I will begin a hobby of monitoring lawsuits. Anytime one in my region is stupid like this... I will sue the plaintiff for wasting tax payers dollars and clogging the courts. Hehehe. Tit for tat, per se.
Actually she wasn't driving, her grandson was and he had stopped so she could add cream etc.
There is a point here that 150-155 degrees is a safer, more comon, and more reasonable temperature for a hot drink than 180 degrees. McDonalds had hundreds of complaints and cases similar to this that they had ignored, including similar injuries.
Here is a scale that shows temperature vs time to 3rd degree burn. (found it here)
In other words serving a drink that can deliver a full thickness burn (3rd degree) in a tenth of a second is irresponsible compared to serving one that takes a whole whopping 2 seconds to scald to a 3rd degree burn. That 1.5-2 extra seconds gives even a slow 79 y.o. person a chance to react and lessen the severity of the burn.
She didn't sue because they sold her coffee, or because she spilled it. She sued over their practice of keeping and serving it dangerously hot, which combined with a simple spill (we've all done it) had a severe effect.
I can't stand baseless lawsuits, but that is why we have judges decide if they will go to trial and juries to hear them. I simply don't believe this was a baseless lawsuit.
There were apparently 12 jurors who felt the same way and found that she had a reasonable grievance, and that a punitave damages large enough to send a message to a corporate giant was in order.
This 79 year old dumbass took on McDonalds in court, and won, they've changed their practice. That's a David and Goliath story and an accomplishment.
It was still and still is one of the worlds stupidest lawsuits ever made IMO. I mean hell look how many lawyer commercials are on TV now you never saw shit like that going back 15 or 20 years ago. I'm just tired myself of this country becoming sue happy.
Active Ink Slinger
Quote by Playmale
I can't stand baseless lawsuits, but that is why we have judges decide if they will go to trial and juries to hear them. I simply don't believe this was a baseless lawsuit.
There were apparently 12 jurors who felt the same way and found that she had a reasonable grievance, and that a punitave damages large enough to send a message to a corporate giant was in order.
This 79 year old dumbass took on McDonalds in court, and won, they've changed their practice. That's a David and Goliath story and an accomplishment.
I disagree. She took the lid off. If I remove the safety precautions on anything marked as dangerous... I am to blame for any injury I receive. Did McD need to keep the coffee so hot? No. But the injury was a result of her stupidity. That she was awarded millions of dollars by a jury doesn't surprise me. But just because a jury was involved, doesn't make her any less stupid for removing the safety precaution... and I yeah, I know people like to add cream and sugar. I add mine through the drink hole, because I'm not stupid enough to take off the safety precaution. In fact, I'm not stupid enough to need a warning on the top of the cup to begin with.
And a 79 year old woman couldn't react in 10 seconds, let alone 2 seconds... she would have gotten third degree burns with 140 degree coffee. She wouldn't be quick enough to get out of her seat-belt.. or maybe she wasn't using that safety device either?
All she accomplished was to help drive up the cost of insurance for businesses, making the rich ones more able to railroad over the smaller businesses that closed because they can't compete... that, and fattened the wallet of her lawyer.
I appreciate your viewpoint, even agree with it in some places. But to me, the McD's case was frivilous. It's about accountability. She took an ill advised choice, got burned and instead of owning her mistake... she cried victim. Like so many people do these days. It may seem callous of me, but I have zero sympathy for her belief she was a victim. I feel for her pain... damn, that had to hurt. But... it was her fault. IMHO
paranormal • erotic • romance
www.forlorn-hope.net
Constant Gardener
Quote by BrindleChaseQuote by Playmale
I appreciate your viewpoint, even agree with it in some places. But to me, the McD's case was frivilous. It's about accountability. She took an ill advised choice, got burned and instead of owning her mistake... she cried victim. Like so many people do these days. It may seem callous of me, but I have zero sympathy for her belief she was a victim. I feel for her pain... damn, that had to hurt. But... it was her fault. IMHO
Get back to us on that, the next time you purchase your coffee, from that outlet you purchase a cup of it from, which regularly brews it at 140 degrees, and scald off all your tastebuds because some 'tard set it to brew at 200 that day and you got the first cup at 190.
I was not aware of all the facts. I vote non-frivolous in this particular instance. Thanks for sharing, Playmale.
The same GQP demanding we move on from January 6th, 2021 is still doing audits of the November 3rd, 2020 election.
Active Ink Slinger
Quote by WellMadeMale
Get back to us on that, the next time you purchase your coffee, from that outlet you purchase a cup of it from, which regularly brews it at 140 degrees, and scald off all your tastebuds because some 'tard set it to brew at 200 that day and you got the first cup at 190.
I was not aware of all the facts. I vote non-frivolous in this particular instance. Thanks for sharing, Playmale.
I won't, don't you worry.
. I make it a point to look out for myself. I don't pour super hot liquid into my mouth without testing it to see how hot it is. And if I did, it would be because I was too groggy or distracted or something like that... in which case, it would still be my fault. So, no, I won't come here and cry victim to you, for something I did to myself. I might come share my misery and laugh at myself with you... but I won't blame something that was in my control and went awry, on someone else. paranormal • erotic • romance
www.forlorn-hope.net