PEORIA#75FAN
New Member
What do think of Xtreme threatening to sue 4m and some who post on the site for slander.
NEVER GET INTO A PI$$ FIGHT WITH A SKUNK
NEVER GET INTO A PI$$ FIGHT WITH A SKUNK
Lawsuit??????
- Thread starter PEORIA#75FAN
- Start date
Dirt
Lets Go Blues
lawsuits...
It seems a little odd to me that they would really do that, but if its true that they can sue over this, and end up really doing just that, then it makes you wonder whats next. Would someone on this site end up suing somebody else next? If so, where would it all end up? Would it drastically change the way everyone posts in the future? Where would freedom of speech come into play in all of this? A lot of questions, but hopefully it never comes to all that.
It seems a little odd to me that they would really do that, but if its true that they can sue over this, and end up really doing just that, then it makes you wonder whats next. Would someone on this site end up suing somebody else next? If so, where would it all end up? Would it drastically change the way everyone posts in the future? Where would freedom of speech come into play in all of this? A lot of questions, but hopefully it never comes to all that.
outlawracer
New Member
Had inlaws like that at one time. I
believe they belonged to the sue indian tribe.
believe they belonged to the sue indian tribe.
The_Dark_One
New Member
Most definitely the first amendment would come into play with this, as that amendment covers both freedom of speech and of the press. This kind of thing has been ruled over many times, and if it were to go so far as being taken to the Supreme Court (which any case involving the Bill of Rights is supposed to), then one would hope they rule on the side of the Constitution (which they usually do).
That said, this whole suing thing has gone way to far...anyone wonder why the medical system has gotten too expensive for anyone except lawyers and insurance companies to profit from it??? Doctors cannot afford to practice anymore and the biggest losers are us patients, who will not be able to recieve care anymore because all the doctors have gone out of practice. Yes, medical costs are too high (and it seems like they always have been), but there are reasons, such as too high of malpractice insurance costs because too many lawsuits.
Sorry if I broke off on a seemingly unrelated tangent...if they want to try and sue because of slander, let them try...and hope reason can be seen by those we trust with ensuring justice.
That said, this whole suing thing has gone way to far...anyone wonder why the medical system has gotten too expensive for anyone except lawyers and insurance companies to profit from it??? Doctors cannot afford to practice anymore and the biggest losers are us patients, who will not be able to recieve care anymore because all the doctors have gone out of practice. Yes, medical costs are too high (and it seems like they always have been), but there are reasons, such as too high of malpractice insurance costs because too many lawsuits.
Sorry if I broke off on a seemingly unrelated tangent...if they want to try and sue because of slander, let them try...and hope reason can be seen by those we trust with ensuring justice.
outlawracer
New Member
Hey Dark One, tangent or not that is one of the things that has been messing up our economy for awhile. Couldn't agree with you more.
The_Dark_One
New Member
Thank You
As I am going to school to get into that particular field, I try to keep myself updated as to the legal sides of it. It is truly a mess, and its probably going to take a long while to clean it up.
As I am going to school to get into that particular field, I try to keep myself updated as to the legal sides of it. It is truly a mess, and its probably going to take a long while to clean it up.
fast one 02
New Member
Just because you have freedom of speech does not give you the right to say something about someone that is untrue and causes them mental, physical or financial harm. That is probably what they are going to sue someone over. In a case like that they have every right to sue, it is slander. I highly doubt they would sue someone for expressing theyr'e opinion.
PEORIA#75FAN
New Member
The Bully Pulpit
Many lawsuits do not have monetary value. Many suits are over ideals, anger etc. etc. You can shut up someone and not violate their rights. Fear is a great weapon. You do not have to be right to sue. IF YOU CAN OUTSPEND SOMEONE in court ; you then sue or threaten to sue them into submisson. those of us who stand on PRINCIPAL soon find out that is not enough. The constitutin does help much when someone can spend you down til you are out of money.
At this time we do not know if this was a legitment E.M. or a hoax.
NEVER GET INTO A PI$$ FIGHT WITH A SKUNK!
Many lawsuits do not have monetary value. Many suits are over ideals, anger etc. etc. You can shut up someone and not violate their rights. Fear is a great weapon. You do not have to be right to sue. IF YOU CAN OUTSPEND SOMEONE in court ; you then sue or threaten to sue them into submisson. those of us who stand on PRINCIPAL soon find out that is not enough. The constitutin does help much when someone can spend you down til you are out of money.
At this time we do not know if this was a legitment E.M. or a hoax.
NEVER GET INTO A PI$$ FIGHT WITH A SKUNK!
28jracer
Joe Prince
I have alot to say...
This site is a forum for people to post their thoughts and opinions as well as news and information sharing related to the the sport of auto racing or just motorsports in general.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion... no matter how wrong you or I think it may be. They, you and I have that right. The fact is... if you are going to voice your opinion, it would make good sense to have the facts to support your opinion or be ready to defend what you say and assume responsibility in the end. You have the right to say what you want but you should ALWAYS be ready to be held accountable for what you say or do.
For slander to be present, their has to be intent. Is the person just merely stating their opinion? Or, was what they said purposely meant to cause harm or punish the other party for their own personal benefit?
It would be like this....
If I posted something on here (this is just for example and is IN NO WAY TRUE) alerting everyone that Jimmy D. was using this site as a front for an illegal business (which is FALSE!) and was bilking money out of the advertisers of this site (again, FALSE!), in an effort to get you (and the advertisers) to switch to my new site instead, in effect, putting Jimmy out of business, THAT could be considered slander from me to Jimmy in which he could sue me for. This would not be MY OPINION, this would be an accusation - which in turn - is slander and I would be held accountable.
If I just simply got on here and said something like "I do not like this site nor it's administrator and have started my own" in an effort to get you to switch to my site, then that would be my OPINION and be considered competitive solicitation.
Now, for the record, I think this site is one of the best in the NATION! Jimmy D does an EXCELLENT job and is an honest business man.
A person would have to KNOWINGLY say something that is untrue or malicious, in an effort to achieve a personal gain (as a result), in order for it to POSSIBLY be considered slander. If no personal gain was achieved by the other person, or any person or company connected to that person, or if the comment was found to be valid and credible, then slander most likely did not occur.
But then again, if I order a cup of coffee, I expect it to be HOT! If I spill it, I expect to get burned - duh! Just proves you can sue and win for just about any rediculous thing in today's world.
If you don't want people on here voicing their opinions, or if you don't want to hear what others have to say, then stay out and keep your own comments to yourself. If you make a post on an open forum such as this - there is a chance that someone out there is going to disagree with you as I'm sure that there are some (and most likely quite a few) who disagree with me now.
One more example: It is MY OPINION that Bob Schmidt is a good driver (even though I have no proof to back me up). I am entitled to that opinion. I must admit, I did achieve personal gain by telling him that once (a free Bob Schmidt t-shirt). Did I slander the other drivers out there by stating that I thought Bob was a good driver? Did I actually slander Bob with the fact that I said that I had no proof? Was there intent or was it just good clean fun?
Let's start out 2004 in the RIGHT direction. Let's keep this a racing oriented site as it was intended to be. If we want to deter from the racing on occasion to talk about... ummmm.... something like trophy girls... that's ok.
One more thing... just for Debbie Cummins... Dean Hoffman is a good driver too! LOL!
This site is a forum for people to post their thoughts and opinions as well as news and information sharing related to the the sport of auto racing or just motorsports in general.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion... no matter how wrong you or I think it may be. They, you and I have that right. The fact is... if you are going to voice your opinion, it would make good sense to have the facts to support your opinion or be ready to defend what you say and assume responsibility in the end. You have the right to say what you want but you should ALWAYS be ready to be held accountable for what you say or do.
For slander to be present, their has to be intent. Is the person just merely stating their opinion? Or, was what they said purposely meant to cause harm or punish the other party for their own personal benefit?
It would be like this....
If I posted something on here (this is just for example and is IN NO WAY TRUE) alerting everyone that Jimmy D. was using this site as a front for an illegal business (which is FALSE!) and was bilking money out of the advertisers of this site (again, FALSE!), in an effort to get you (and the advertisers) to switch to my new site instead, in effect, putting Jimmy out of business, THAT could be considered slander from me to Jimmy in which he could sue me for. This would not be MY OPINION, this would be an accusation - which in turn - is slander and I would be held accountable.
If I just simply got on here and said something like "I do not like this site nor it's administrator and have started my own" in an effort to get you to switch to my site, then that would be my OPINION and be considered competitive solicitation.
Now, for the record, I think this site is one of the best in the NATION! Jimmy D does an EXCELLENT job and is an honest business man.
A person would have to KNOWINGLY say something that is untrue or malicious, in an effort to achieve a personal gain (as a result), in order for it to POSSIBLY be considered slander. If no personal gain was achieved by the other person, or any person or company connected to that person, or if the comment was found to be valid and credible, then slander most likely did not occur.
But then again, if I order a cup of coffee, I expect it to be HOT! If I spill it, I expect to get burned - duh! Just proves you can sue and win for just about any rediculous thing in today's world.
If you don't want people on here voicing their opinions, or if you don't want to hear what others have to say, then stay out and keep your own comments to yourself. If you make a post on an open forum such as this - there is a chance that someone out there is going to disagree with you as I'm sure that there are some (and most likely quite a few) who disagree with me now.
One more example: It is MY OPINION that Bob Schmidt is a good driver (even though I have no proof to back me up). I am entitled to that opinion. I must admit, I did achieve personal gain by telling him that once (a free Bob Schmidt t-shirt). Did I slander the other drivers out there by stating that I thought Bob was a good driver? Did I actually slander Bob with the fact that I said that I had no proof? Was there intent or was it just good clean fun?
Let's start out 2004 in the RIGHT direction. Let's keep this a racing oriented site as it was intended to be. If we want to deter from the racing on occasion to talk about... ummmm.... something like trophy girls... that's ok.
One more thing... just for Debbie Cummins... Dean Hoffman is a good driver too! LOL!
PEORIA#75FAN
New Member
wrong button
woops; sorry meant to post this on litigaters. com
woops; sorry meant to post this on litigaters. com
t.nie
Patience Tester
The case you just referred to was not, as you just claimed it to be, "ridiculous" at all.
Mcdonalds wanted to sell coffee, and to do so, they set out to fill their restaurants with the aroma of freshly brewed coffee, to entice their customers to buy it. It was discovered that coffee heated way beyond what could actually be drunk would also give off the strongest aroma over the widest area. The powers that be at McD's decided that that was what they wanted; the aroma of freshly brewed coffee wafting through their restaurants every morning.
The lady in question that you referred to suffered deep penetrating burns to her legs, she was maimed to the point of requiring plastic surgery to repair the tissue, and she will be scarred for life. Does that sound like the normal "hot coffee" you make at home? Are those the kinds of "burns" you expect to get from your "HOT" coffee? Of course not. (Much as you might like to perpetuate the myth that a lot of stupid nonsense cases go to court, the facts dont bear that out, unless your idea of court is Judge Joe Brown on daytime tv.)
The courts decided that in fact, the product she was sold under the name of "coffee" was in fact a liquid so ridiculously overheated that it was a health hazard, not a consumable beverage; in fact, it was totally undrinkable unless you were a sadist who wished to inflict severe burns on your face. If she had drunk it, it would have ripped the flesh off of her mouth and throat, and quite possibly could have killed her. The evidence of the horrific injuries to her legs, and her pain and suffering was obvious. She was awarded substantial (and totally justified) damages, and McDonalds was found to be guilty of selling goods unfit for consumption to the public. They now serve coffee at a much reduced temperature.
The court also did not think it unreasonable or careless or negligent for a person to place a cup between their legs and drive off with it, because she had every right to feel confident that even if the coffee did spill, it would not be so hot as to cause the incredibly severe injuries it did.
I think this really just illustrates how easy it is to post anything on the net, whether its the truth or not.
racefantoo
New Member
Very well said.
It's not as easy to successfully sue someone as one might think.
To prevail in a lawsuit you must alledge an act or acts of illegal wrongdoing and each act of wrongdoing has certain elements that make up and constitute that act of wrongdoing
To win you then must prove each and every element that makes up that act, not an easy task, as the defedant must prevent you from proving only one of the elements to win.
Lawsuits may sometimes sound silly and I'm sure some are, but the ones that prevail must have merit or they fail.
It's not as easy to successfully sue someone as one might think.
To prevail in a lawsuit you must alledge an act or acts of illegal wrongdoing and each act of wrongdoing has certain elements that make up and constitute that act of wrongdoing
To win you then must prove each and every element that makes up that act, not an easy task, as the defedant must prevent you from proving only one of the elements to win.
Lawsuits may sometimes sound silly and I'm sure some are, but the ones that prevail must have merit or they fail.
Debbie Cummins
Bomber Momma #19
To 28jracer
Thank you! Yes, DEAN HOFFMAN is a good racer, too!
And just to set the record straight, so I don't have to sue you for misspelling my name, it's
CUMMINS (no "G"), just like CUMMINS DIESEL.
Thank you very much.
Thank you! Yes, DEAN HOFFMAN is a good racer, too!
And just to set the record straight, so I don't have to sue you for misspelling my name, it's
CUMMINS (no "G"), just like CUMMINS DIESEL.
Thank you very much.
I thought this was about slander and not McDonalds. By the way, the appellate court dropped the amount that the jury awarded the lady in the McDonald's case and after attorney's fees and medical bills, she did not get a whole lot. As for the 1st amendment protection, dark-one you have much to learn. The 1st amendment does not protect all kinds of speech.
Anyone can threaten to sue. Threaten all you want; however, what are your damages. Forget about intent. You have to be able to show that your reputation was damaged and prove that amount. I am not too worried about any libel (the written word) suits.
P.S. Dark-one I am going to sue you for bad mouthing lawyers
Anyone can threaten to sue. Threaten all you want; however, what are your damages. Forget about intent. You have to be able to show that your reputation was damaged and prove that amount. I am not too worried about any libel (the written word) suits.
P.S. Dark-one I am going to sue you for bad mouthing lawyers
t.nie
Patience Tester
The point I was making, and which you are so helpfully reinforcing, is that it is very easy for people to get on a site an post stuff that is not necessarily true. So, just to help you out a little bit and demonstrate again how easy it is for anyone to put fiction on the net, here are some more facts concerning the Liebeck case:
She was awarded compensatory damages in the amount of $160,000, this award is what she received to pay her legal and medical bills arising from the burns and bringing the case. So, she did not lose a dime of her award to her doctor's or lawyer's, as you claim. She was originally awarded $2.7 million in punitive damages by the jury, but this award was reduced to $480,000 by the judge. Both sides appealed the $480,000 figure, Liebeck saying it was not enough, McD's saying it was too much. A settlement was reached out of court, and a gag clause was agreed as well, so the final settlement will never be known. Needless to say, it was in excess of the $480,000, as that amount was guaranteed by the judge.
Now, maybe you think $480,000 isnt "a whole lot," but I do, and I would think that many others would think that kind of money is "a whole lot" too. I guess this just demonstrates once again, that anyone can post anything on the net, whether its fact or not.
She was awarded compensatory damages in the amount of $160,000, this award is what she received to pay her legal and medical bills arising from the burns and bringing the case. So, she did not lose a dime of her award to her doctor's or lawyer's, as you claim. She was originally awarded $2.7 million in punitive damages by the jury, but this award was reduced to $480,000 by the judge. Both sides appealed the $480,000 figure, Liebeck saying it was not enough, McD's saying it was too much. A settlement was reached out of court, and a gag clause was agreed as well, so the final settlement will never be known. Needless to say, it was in excess of the $480,000, as that amount was guaranteed by the judge.
Now, maybe you think $480,000 isnt "a whole lot," but I do, and I would think that many others would think that kind of money is "a whole lot" too. I guess this just demonstrates once again, that anyone can post anything on the net, whether its fact or not.
The_Dark_One
New Member
Perhaps I should clarify this however, as my opinion goes: not all lawyers are bad, in fact they can come in handy. I just can't stand those who advertise that you can sue the medical field and get rich quick. Yes, some caregivers are not good people; I should know, I have been at some of their not-so-great mercies. Yet it seems like people forget that those caregivers are human beings too (oft-times greatly sleep-deprived and under a lot of stress), and don't know absolutely everything. Sometimes, a mistake is merely a mistake, intent has nothing to do with it. Great damage can be caused by those mistakes (again, I have had firsthand experience with this). But now I can't go see the same doctors because of malpractice insurance. When I get really serious problems because of that, who do I sue then?
