03.29.16

Top 7 Frivolous Personal Injury Lawsuits

Posted in Frivolous Lawsuits at 3:16 pm by kevin

Most cases that accident and personal injury lawyers handle are very serious, where they have to deal with the well-being and safety of people who were hurt due to others’ negligence. But similar to other areas of the law, personal injury is also susceptible to truly weird cases that are hard to believe unless you hear them yourself. Counting down from 7 to 1, here are some of the most unusual personal injury cases in legal history:

 

  1. Missing Pants

Of course, you would find it inconvenient and annoying if your dry cleaner lost one of your garments. However, administrative law judge in Washington, D.C., Roy L. Pearson, Jr., took it a level further by suing for $54 million when his dry cleaner lost a pair of his trousers, claiming a failure of the company to live up to the “Satisfaction Guaranteed” sign displayed and the mental anguish he had. The case came to an end in favor of the dry-cleaning business owners after years of legal battle.

 

  1. Eating Rats

In 2005, a man in Ohio in 2005 thought NBC’s Fear Factor went too far when contestants were challenged to eat rats. This display caused him to become nauseous, throw up and made him dizzy as he tried to make his way out of the room. He claimed that NBC should pay $2.5 million for his suffering, but the case was thrown out.

 

  1. Befriending a Killer Whale

The word “killer” in a certain name should deter you from getting close to an individual, or in this occasion, an animal—a killer whale. However, not in this tragic case. A 27-year-old man in Florida went to great lengths to achieve his dream of swimming with this animal at Sea World. Having managed to hide from the establishment’s security at closing time, he entered the mammal’s tank, so you should know what comes next—he was killed by the whale. Then, his parents thought the park was responsible and sued it for their son’s death, ironically claiming that it should have displayed signs stating the killer whale’s killing capacity. However, the parents dropped the case not long after it was filed.

 

  1. Knife in a Sandwich

One man in New York had a very unpleasant dining experience at Subway when he found a serrated knife in his sandwich bread. Though he noticed it, preventing him to sustain any cuts from shard, he did still claim to get sick after eating part of the sandwich, which may have been contaminated, granting him to receive $20,000.

 

  1. Not the Weather As Expected

A woman in Israel actually sued a television station for stress and irreparable damage that resulted from an inaccurate weather forecast, which caused her to dress inappropriately and caught in the rain unexpectedly in light clothing, even making her sick, pay for medication and miss work. She won her $1000 from the legal battle.

 

  1. Stopping for Doughnuts

It is not always good to stop for doughnuts, especially when you are driving an ambulance to transport an injured boy to the hospital—well, one man did! Unsurprisingly, the boy’s mother filed a complaint leading to the driver’s termination.

 

  1. Enter at Your own Risk

When you enter an attraction that includes the word “horror”, then you should know what to expect. However, a 57-year-old woman visiting Halloween Horror Nights haunted house at Universal Studios claimed to have still feeling unreasonably frightened after the experience, stating that she resultantly suffered mental anguish and psychological trauma. Though these are legitimate injuries, they may have not been so legitimate in a case of someone opting to enter a haunted house, which means her case was dismissed.

 

Resource

http://www.lawfuel.com/blog/7-of-the-strangest-personal-injury-cases-in-history/

 

01.13.14

Antisocial Psychopath Sues Nike in Shoe Stomping Incident

Posted in Frivolous Lawsuits at 10:58 am by kevin

An Oregon pimp who was labeled an “antisocial psychopath” by a psychologist at his trial is suing Nike in a products liability lawsuit. The pimp brutally stomped a man’s face while wearing Nike shoes when the man refused to pay one of his prostitutes.

According to IBTimes, “Clardy received a 100-year prison sentence for the beating and subsequent robbing of the man, and for beating the 18-year-old woman he forced into prostitution. The man required plastic surgery and the woman bled from the ears. In 2013 jurors found him guilty of second-degree assault …

“…He claims Nike should have placed a warning in his Air Jordan shoes to let wearers know that they could be considered a dangerous weapon.”

 

04.03.12

Motley Rice Law Firm Pays $400,000 for Frivolous Lawsuit

Posted in Frivolous Lawsuits at 10:29 am by kevin

The well-known law firm of Motley Rice (not to be confused with Motley Crew) has been ordered to pay $400,000 in a frivolous lawsuit. The lawsuit was aimed at ITT Educational Services in a whistleblower case.

According to the plaintiff, Debra Leveski, however, she did not have any complaints against ITT Educational Services while she was associated with them. It was only after she was gone that she was approached by representatives for Motley Rice that she had gotten the idea that she may be able to win a lucrative whistleblower case.

One of the flaws with the case, however, according to the judge is that she did not blow the whistle until after the fact. Another flaw is that she was pursued by her attorneys in going forward with this case. U.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt created a 31-page order which laid some responsibility on both parties for continuing this frivolous case that wasted the court’s time and the defendant’s money.

03.06.12

Frivolous Lawsuit over Movie Theatre Popcorn Filed

Posted in Frivolous Lawsuits at 5:09 pm by kevin

A Michigan man has filed a class-action lawsuit against a movie theatre in what he’s calling a price gouging case. The man has stated that he doesn’t like the price of popcorn, candy and soda at the local theatre so he’s willing to bring a lawsuit to test the boundaries of the consumer protection laws in that state.

According to the Vancouver Sun, “Thompson, an avid moviegoer from Livonia, Mich., used to bypass the high prices charged for theatre popcorn, soda and candy by bringing in his own treats, said his attorney, Kerry Morgan. But Thompson arrived at his local theater outside Detroit recently to find a new sign telling customers they were no longer allowed to bring in their own goodies.”

Some people are calling this a frivolous lawsuit, taking up the court’s time, man-power and man hours along with that of the attorneys and company involved. We’ll let you form your own opinion on this one.

12.17.10

Frivolous Lawsuit Regarding Exploding Escargot

Posted in Frivolous Lawsuits at 12:00 am by kevin

If it wasn’t for the fact that a frivolous lawsuit takes up the time of the plaintiff, defendants, the courts and many times lawyers and staff, some could be called entertaining. Such is not the case, however, in Northern California at a San Rafael restaurant where two men sued the restaurant for “exploding escargot”.

Supposedly garlic butter from the Seafood Peddler snails escaped from the shells and got splattered upon the shirts of the two men. The $7,500 lawsuit alleged negligence, pain and suffering along with staff indifference.

It’s these kinds of frivolous lawsuits that clog up the courts and push back dates for actual personal injury lawsuits that have merit. This case would have been better suited for Judge Judy than Judge Chernus who had to hear and rule on this ridiculous case. Mark another one up for the Darwin Awards.

12.29.07

Dead Man Not Liable In Lawsuit Against Him

Posted in Frivolous Lawsuits at 8:11 am by kevin

In 2003, Walter Rich died in the infamous Station Nightclub fire in Boston, which took 100 other lives. But, this hasn’t stopped an old friend, Brian Sullivan from suing him. While at Rich’s home, Sullivan tripped over a 55-gallon drum buried in the garage floor. The fall caused Sullivan to tear his right rotator cuff, which required medical attention.

The judge in the case ordered that Walter Rich’s duty of care towards Sullivan and all other individuals ended upon his death. This case has set a precedent in the state, oddly enough, limiting the liability a person may incur only to the time in which they are living.

11.14.07

Judge Lost Pants Now Loses His Shirt

Posted in Frivolous Lawsuits at 4:43 pm by kevin

Judge Roy Pearson had brought forth a $54 million lawsuit against South Korean immigrants who own a dry cleaning company saying they had lost a pair of his pants. Pearson who was an administrative law judge in Washington D. C. has now lost his job over the incident.

Pearson was suing Customs Cleaners for the loss of his trousers, mental anguish and attorneys fees, which he calculated to be $67 million, but later reduced to $54 million. Pearson claimed the cleaners did not live up to their “satisfaction guaranteed” motto.

Pearson was deselected for another term as judge as apparently his performance was not satisfactory.

03.15.07

Three Oklahoma Tort Reform Bills Passes Senate

Posted in Frivolous Lawsuits, Tort Reform at 1:17 pm by kevin

Three major tort reform bills have passed the Oklahoma State Senate. One bill, SB 824, is authored by Democratic State Senator Susan Paddack, which protects doctors against frivolous lawsuits. The bi-partisan bills passed an evenly divided Senate and now make their way to the House.

The other two lawsuit reform bills, SB 1024 and SB 507 are sponsored by republican senators, Owen Laughlin and Cliff Branan, respectively. SB 1024 helps teachers and educators maintain discipline in the classroom without fear of lawsuit.

SB 507 was written initially to protect volunteers and others who help charitable organizations remain exempt from liability when helping in emergency situations such as transportation needs. Democratic Senator Jay Paul Gumm, then tacked on a seemingly unrelated amendment to this bill to protect firearm manufacturers from liability from criminal use of their weapons.

Tort reform has been a hot button issue in recent times, pitting Republicans and Democrats against one another in sometimes quite contentious battles. Many see tort reform as means to redistribution of wealth within this country while others view it on purely ideological basis. It is refreshing, however, to see politicians working out common sense tort reform issues on a bi-partisan basis that will benefit the most people possible.