Only in America

[mashman]

I see your America and raise you some utterly unbelievable shit from Canada:

Woman sues family of dead boy

"Simon is chasing $1.2 million from the Majewski family. The woman blames the boys for the accident, branding them as "incompetent bicyclists".

Simon, a mother of three, admitted to police that she had been speeding and claimed that she didn't see the boys or the orange-red pedal reflectors on their bikes."

That's pretty fucked up.

[awa355]

Woman sues family of dead boy


Thats bloody pathetic. If this was a NZ case, ACC would probably side with her and give her a big fat cheque.

[frogfeaturesFZR]

Woman sues family of dead boy


Thats bloody pathetic. If this was a NZ case, ACC would probably side with her and give her a big fat cheque.

Sadly you're probably right.

[husaberg]

Early on the morning of July 7, 2001, a prankster dumped detergent into Canal Park's Fountain of Wind in Duluth, Minn., creating a mountain of bubbles. Several hours later, passerby Kathy Kelly walked into the suds and slipped into the fountain, sustaining a laceration to her left lower shin. Due to her diabetes the cut later became infected, resulting in $43,000 of medical expenses.
Kelly sued the city because it had not cleaned up the suds or posted warning signs, despite the fact that municipal workers had received a call concerning the hazard some four hours earlier. In March 2004, a jury found the city 70 percent responsible and Kelly 30 percent responsible for the injury, awarding $125,000 to the plaintiff. The fountain is now encircled by a railing.

[husaberg]

It's hard to believe that anyone could win a lawsuit for being injured while trespassing on someone else's property. But that's exactly what happened to two Lancaster, Pa., teens who were severely burned atop a parked railroad car in 2002. While out skateboarding, Jeffrey Kline and Brett Birdwell illegally entered property owned by Amtrak and Norfolk Southern Corp. and climbed on top of a boxcar in hopes of getting a view of the city. An uninsulated wire suspended above the train jolted Klein with 12,500 volts of electricity, causing severe burns over 75 percent of his body. Birdwell received burns over 12 percent of his body when he ran to assist his friend, whose clothes were on fire.
In the October 2006 trial, a jury said that, although they were trespassing, the 17-year-old boys bore no responsibility for the accident. Instead the blame fell entirely on Amtrak and Norfolk Southern for failing to post signs warning of the danger from the electrified wires that power locomotives. For medical costs, pain and suffering, and "loss of life pleasures," the teens received a combined $24.2 million.

[husaberg]

Some people might be honored to resemble a famous athlete -- but not Allen Heckard. The Portland, Ore., man said he had been mistaken for basketball legend Michael Jordan almost every day for 15 years -- and was sick of it.
In 2006, he sued the former Chicago Bull along with Nike cofounder Phil Knight (for promoting Jordan) for a combined $832 million, claiming personal injury and emotional pain and suffering. Heckard, an African-American with a shaved head and an earring in his left ear, did look a little like Jordan, but he was also 6 inches (15.24 centimeters) shorter and eight years older than his more famous counterpart. He soon dropped the lawsuit. It was pretty clear that Heckard's case didn't have a leg to stand on after he explained why he chose to sue Jordan and Knight for $416 million each: "Well," Heckard reasoned, "you figure with my age and you multiply that times seven and, ah, then I turn around and, ah, I figure that's what it all boils down to."

[husaberg]

In 2007, Roy Pearson, a Washington, D.C., judge, filed one of the most outrageous lawsuits of recent times when he sued a small mom-and-pop dry cleaner over a pair of pants. Pearson claimed that the shop's owners, Jin and Soo Chung, misplaced his pants after he brought them in for a $10.50 alteration, and then tried to return a cheap, imitation pair of his $800 trousers. Though the Chungs felt they'd done nothing wrong, they ultimately offered to settle with the judge for $12,000.
Unimpressed, the judge sued the Chungs and their son, asserting that the "Satisfaction Guaranteed" and "Same Day Service" signs posted in the store represented an "unconditional guarantee" that entitled him to a considerably larger settlement. Pearson sought $1,500 per defendant for each of the estimated 12,000 days that the signs appeared in the dry cleaners. The judge's claims also included emotional damages, the cost of a rental car used to drive to another dry cleaner and legal fees -- even though Pearson represented himself. The total amount of the lawsuit? A whopping $67 million, which was later reduced to a still-outrageous $54 million.
Fortunately, a judge in the District of Columbia ruled in favor of the Chungs and ordered Pearson to pay the couple's court costs, and their attorney fees as well. In a further blow to Pearson, a committee refused to reappoint him to his job as an administrative law judge, in part because of the questionable behavior he displayed in the Chung case.

[husaberg]

Jail gives inmates a lot of time to think, and a Chesapeake, Va., prisoner used the hours to come up with an exceptionally innovative lawsuit. In 1995, Robert Lee Brock sued himself for $5 million, claiming that he violated his own civil rights when he was arrested two years earlier for breaking and entering and grand larceny.
"I partook of alcoholic beverages in 1993, July 1st, as a result I caused myself to violate my religious beliefs. This was done by my going out and getting arrested," wrote Brock in the lawsuit he filed in federal court. But because he had no income in jail, Brock asked that the state pay him the multi-million dollar settlement. Judge Rebecca Beach Smith dismissed his claim as "ludicrous" but acknowledged his "innovative approach to civil rights litigation."

[husaberg]

A list of outrageous lawsuits would be incomplete without the case of Stella Liebeck, an Albuquerque, N.M., woman who spilled a cup of McDonald's coffee on her lap while sitting in the passenger seat of a parked car. As a result, the 79-year-old suffered third degree burns on her groin, inner thighs and buttocks and spent seven days in the hospital. When she contacted McDonald's about compensating her for the medical bills, the restaurant chain took her to court. After a weeklong trial, the jury awarded Liebeck $160,000 in compensatory damages and $2.7 million in punitive damages, which a court later reduced to $480,000. Both parties appealed, and they eventually settled out of court for an undisclosed amount.
While the ruling provoked outrage among many Americans, others saw her as a victim. The 2011 documentary "Hot Coffee" promotes the latter viewpoint, noting the alleged indifference McDonald's executives displayed to the fact that their coffee caused burns, as well as the public's misconceptions that emerged from the proceedings -- namely, the belief that Liebeck was driving and the car was moving.
Love the verdict or hate it, there's little question that Liebeck's lawsuit resulted in one of the most famous cases of recent decades. It became the butt of many jokes for late-night comedians and was even parodied in a 1995 episode of the popular television show "Seinfeld." The case also inspired the creation of the Stella Awards, which highlight particularly "wild, outrageous, or ridiculous lawsuits."

[mashman]

The world's gone all silly. Must be time for new management.

[husaberg]

The cracks in American society are appearing....

[husaberg]

As it says only in America.

[Big Dog]

That last couple are a husband and wife from the UK. They were on Age Gap Love documentary series. So that one is bs.

Sent via tapatalk.

[husaberg]

That last couple are a husband and wife from the UK. They were on Age Gap Love documentary series. So that one is bs.

Sent via tapatalk.

I wondered if they were poms when I saw their teeth...........
Laava said ther same thing it was on my computer for a week or so, So bugger knows where i found it or what I was looking for when I did.

[awa355]

Also from the US. 3,318 years plus life without parole. In NZ, he would still be eligible to apply for parole after a third of his sentance.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news...ectid=11503618