(no subject)
There was a big ol' feminist rant here about some stupid bitch who thinks that loveless sex is the downfall of society but it was boring.
Instead, I bring you idiot lawsuits of the day!
HOMEOWNERS SUED BY CLEANING LADY WHO MISTAKES FIRECRACKER FOR A CANDLE
A woman from Grand Haven, Michigan filed a lawsuit for more than $25,000 after she was injured by a firecracker she took from a condominium that she had cleaned. While dining later with friends at a restaurant, the woman lit the firecracker claiming that she mistakenly thought it was a decorative candle. The explosion resulted in severe injuries to the woman. She sued the owners of the condo for leaving the firecracker behind without a warning on it. The condo owners said that they had placed the device, which looks like a "huge firecracker," in a cupboard to keep it away from the children after someone left it at their house after a party.
Wait, she's suing because she stole the firecracker and hurt herself using it?
WOMAN IN WHEELCHAIR ROLLS INTO PARKING GATE, BUT HER LAWSUIT GETS WHEELED OUT OF COURT
While an employee of Hutzel Hospital was being pushed in a wheelchair through an entrance ramp that was not intended to be used by people in wheelchairs, she was struck in the head by a parking gate. The woman sued the makers of the gate for causing her closed head injuries and shoulder and neck pains. Other employees of the hospital stated that the ramp was not meant for wheelchairs and that there was a walkway next to the parking lot that accommodated wheelchairs. The jury found the maker of the gate not to be at fault.
Does that mean that every time I'm at work and goofing off and I get hurt I can sue someone?
ARSONISTS SUE FOR INSURANCE BENEFITS AFTER BEING DENIED COVERAGE FOR DAMAGES THEY CAUSED TO NEIGHBORING BUILDING
Two Alpena, Michigan men set an arson fire in their store with the hope of collecting insurance money. They admitted that they intended to simply have a small, smokey fire that would damage their inventory, which apparently wasn't selling very well, so they could collect on their insurance policy. However, when the fire spilled over into the adjoining store, the men sued the insurance company. They argued that they set the fire in their own store, but that the fire next door was accidental and therefore they should receive coverage for the damage to the other building. A panel of the state Court of Appeals amazingly reversed the trial court's decision to dismiss this ridiculous case, but the Michigan Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, eventually reversed the Court of Appeals and ruled that the fire "cannot be characterized as an accident."
"I'm a greedy bastard, so I'm going to try insurance fraud! Oh shit! The fire is spreading! Oh crap! We've been caught! Wait! We didn't mean to set the other store on fire! It was an accident! You should give us money!"
WOMAN SUES CHILD AFTER ICE SKATING COLLISION
A 12 year old girl was skating at a public ice rink in Berkley, Michigan when she ran into another skater and knocked her down causing a knee injury to the fallen skater. The injured woman sued the girl. The trial court dismissed the case saying that the child's manner was not reckless. The trial court stated that the accident occurred during an open skating session at the ice rink and that there are certain risks that must be assumed by participants in recreational activities, especially on ice which is in itself dangerous because of its slippery and hard nature. Sadly, a panel of the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court decision and allowed the case to go to trial. Fortunately for the girl and her family, the Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals stating that "When one combines the nature of ice with the relative proximity of skaters of various abilities, a degree of risk is readily apparent..."
First, what kind of idiot goes ice skating and doesn't expect to fall? Second, what kind of idiot doesn't watch where they are going when ice skating? Third, what kind of cold heartless bitch tries to blame being a clumsy ox on a kid?
HOMEOWNER SUES SAYING: "THIS DUST IS TRESPASSING!"
A Michigan couple sued the owners of a nearby business claiming that dust, noise and vibrations invaded their property and therefore were trespassing. A jury actually found in their favor, but a Court of Appeals panel overturned the jury's verdict. The Appeals court stated that noise, vibrations and dust are intangible objects and can not be considered as trespassers.
I just can't think of anything else to say. I mean... Wow.
I need an icon of that. I sooo need an icon of that.
Instead, I bring you idiot lawsuits of the day!
HOMEOWNERS SUED BY CLEANING LADY WHO MISTAKES FIRECRACKER FOR A CANDLE
A woman from Grand Haven, Michigan filed a lawsuit for more than $25,000 after she was injured by a firecracker she took from a condominium that she had cleaned. While dining later with friends at a restaurant, the woman lit the firecracker claiming that she mistakenly thought it was a decorative candle. The explosion resulted in severe injuries to the woman. She sued the owners of the condo for leaving the firecracker behind without a warning on it. The condo owners said that they had placed the device, which looks like a "huge firecracker," in a cupboard to keep it away from the children after someone left it at their house after a party.
Wait, she's suing because she stole the firecracker and hurt herself using it?
WOMAN IN WHEELCHAIR ROLLS INTO PARKING GATE, BUT HER LAWSUIT GETS WHEELED OUT OF COURT
While an employee of Hutzel Hospital was being pushed in a wheelchair through an entrance ramp that was not intended to be used by people in wheelchairs, she was struck in the head by a parking gate. The woman sued the makers of the gate for causing her closed head injuries and shoulder and neck pains. Other employees of the hospital stated that the ramp was not meant for wheelchairs and that there was a walkway next to the parking lot that accommodated wheelchairs. The jury found the maker of the gate not to be at fault.
Does that mean that every time I'm at work and goofing off and I get hurt I can sue someone?
ARSONISTS SUE FOR INSURANCE BENEFITS AFTER BEING DENIED COVERAGE FOR DAMAGES THEY CAUSED TO NEIGHBORING BUILDING
Two Alpena, Michigan men set an arson fire in their store with the hope of collecting insurance money. They admitted that they intended to simply have a small, smokey fire that would damage their inventory, which apparently wasn't selling very well, so they could collect on their insurance policy. However, when the fire spilled over into the adjoining store, the men sued the insurance company. They argued that they set the fire in their own store, but that the fire next door was accidental and therefore they should receive coverage for the damage to the other building. A panel of the state Court of Appeals amazingly reversed the trial court's decision to dismiss this ridiculous case, but the Michigan Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, eventually reversed the Court of Appeals and ruled that the fire "cannot be characterized as an accident."
"I'm a greedy bastard, so I'm going to try insurance fraud! Oh shit! The fire is spreading! Oh crap! We've been caught! Wait! We didn't mean to set the other store on fire! It was an accident! You should give us money!"
WOMAN SUES CHILD AFTER ICE SKATING COLLISION
A 12 year old girl was skating at a public ice rink in Berkley, Michigan when she ran into another skater and knocked her down causing a knee injury to the fallen skater. The injured woman sued the girl. The trial court dismissed the case saying that the child's manner was not reckless. The trial court stated that the accident occurred during an open skating session at the ice rink and that there are certain risks that must be assumed by participants in recreational activities, especially on ice which is in itself dangerous because of its slippery and hard nature. Sadly, a panel of the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court decision and allowed the case to go to trial. Fortunately for the girl and her family, the Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals stating that "When one combines the nature of ice with the relative proximity of skaters of various abilities, a degree of risk is readily apparent..."
First, what kind of idiot goes ice skating and doesn't expect to fall? Second, what kind of idiot doesn't watch where they are going when ice skating? Third, what kind of cold heartless bitch tries to blame being a clumsy ox on a kid?
HOMEOWNER SUES SAYING: "THIS DUST IS TRESPASSING!"
A Michigan couple sued the owners of a nearby business claiming that dust, noise and vibrations invaded their property and therefore were trespassing. A jury actually found in their favor, but a Court of Appeals panel overturned the jury's verdict. The Appeals court stated that noise, vibrations and dust are intangible objects and can not be considered as trespassers.
I just can't think of anything else to say. I mean... Wow.
I need an icon of that. I sooo need an icon of that.