Imagine this situation in a movie or TV show. The character buys an expensive (redundant term) Porsche. As he drives along, he's bothered by the sun glaring off the dashboard. Naturally, he goes to his lawyer and sues Porsche. Porsche folds, and agrees to buy expensive sunglasses for their customers. Yes, it sounds ridiculous, but this really happened.
http://jalopnik.com/lawsuit-settlement-forces-porsche-to-buy-sunglasses-for-1797798617
jerryc41 wrote:
Imagine this situation in a movie or TV show. The character buys an expensive (redundant term) Porsche. As he drives along, he's bothered by the sun glaring off the dashboard. Naturally, he goes to his lawyer and sues Porsche. Porsche folds, and agrees to buy expensive sunglasses for their customers. Yes, it sounds ridiculous, but this really happened.
http://jalopnik.com/lawsuit-settlement-forces-porsche-to-buy-sunglasses-for-1797798617Exactly what this World is coming too!
What the article does not tell us is how much the attorneys got for filing this lawsuit. There-in lies the reason for these lawsuits.
Back in the 70's when I was an active pilot. A drunk stoled an aircraft barely flew it around and eventually crashed and killed himself. Wife brought a lawsuit against the aircraft manufacturer, the wheel manufacturer and engine and prop manufacturer for negligence. By the way the airplane was locked, the drunk broke the lock. She won. Lawsuits like that almost put the light aircraft industry out of business until the laws changed and prevented further suits.
When I lived in Florida, I always used one of those windshield screens to prevent the car from getting as hot as it will get without the screen. You know what I mean; these are the things that cover the entire windshield. Printed on the side facing the driver were the words, "Do not drive with windshield covered." They were clearly worried about some idiot trying to drive with his windshield covered in cardboard, and getting sued because of the driver's stupidity.
Anybody still asking why everything cost so much, this is a good part of rhe reason, why in hell didn't this juge thrown this lawsuit back and bill them for the cost of waisting court time.
My guess is Porsche sent them Porsche sun glasses and wrote the whole thing off to advertising. Really cool paint-job...
Rab-Eye wrote:
...and getting sued because of the driver's stupidity.
That's the reason right there.
Most attorneys will do anything to make a buck. They just don't care what it costs the people just so long as they get their fees.
Add to the list "suing camera mfrs for faulty cameras because of eye damage due to Solar Eclipse!
Tet68survivor wrote:
Add to the list "suing camera mfrs for faulty cameras because of eye damage due to Solar Eclipse!
You're getting ahead of yourself. That won't happen till August 22. Although my Nikon manuals do warn about shooting directly at the sun, I bet someone will try to sue.
It's like blaming the U.S. government for the EMP that took out all your electronic stuff destroyed when North Korea bombs Guam! Duh!
Hal81
Loc: Bucks County, Pa.
I don't think you can beat the woman that sued McDonalds when she spilled her hot coffee on herself and won. Where are these judges coming from??? O now I remember----Here comes the judge--Here comes the judge--Here comes the judge.
Hal81 wrote:
I don't think you can beat the woman that sued McDonalds when she spilled her hot coffee on herself and won. Where are these judges coming from??? O now I remember----Here comes the judge--Here comes the judge--Here comes the judge.
Probably at least a close second would be the woman who put her RV on cruise control and walked into the kitchen area to make herself a sandwich, then sued the RV manufacturer (and won) after her vehicle crashed!!
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.