Only in the Daily Mail!
I understand that compensation is sometimes justified, but these sound more like "throwing something at the wall to see if it sticks..."
Lawsuits
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
I'm surprised there's a 70mph permissive speed through the station with open low level platforms like that, if the photo is accurate.
If she wins the case her lawyers will probably want an
arm and a leg for their work.
arm and a leg for their work.
Harleyhouse: Ouch! 
PRR Man: Edgebrook is on the Milwaukee District North Line, and it is triple-track, so it may allow 70 mph through there, and the Amtrak Milwaukee-bound service runs at relatively high speed (for a non-Northeast Corridor service) for most of its trip.
PRR Man: Edgebrook is on the Milwaukee District North Line, and it is triple-track, so it may allow 70 mph through there, and the Amtrak Milwaukee-bound service runs at relatively high speed (for a non-Northeast Corridor service) for most of its trip.
What ever happened to looking both ways before crossing a street or in this case the railroad tracks?
Parts is parts. 
That assumes that one has some responsibility for one's self. Sadly, the word "responsibility" it not something very highly regarded in today's society.quote:Originally posted by Matt A:
What ever happened to looking both ways before crossing a street or in this case the railroad tracks?
That word has been replaced with "rights," "lawsuits" and "It''s not MY fault!"
The woman suing for damages in this case is an idiot.
Until there are repercussions for individuals and the lawyers who represent them for these frivolous, if not ridiculous, lawsuits we will continue to see them. But that will not happen as long as the legal profession is our largest pool of elected officials.
I still remember the "ultimate lawsuit" from some 20 years ago in Michigan. A man commited suicide by sitting in his running Buick, inside his closed garage. Naturally the ambulance chasing attorney SUIED BUICK MOTOR DIVISION of General Motors Corporation! Why???? Because there was no "automatic engine shut-down device, in the event of excessive carbom monoxide"!!!!
Naturally the judge threw the case out of court.
Naturally the judge threw the case out of court.
quote:Originally posted by German:
Until there are repercussions for individuals and the lawyers who represent them for these frivolous, if not ridiculous, lawsuits we will continue to see them. But that will not happen as long as the legal profession is our largest pool of elected officials.
I've said it before and will say it again. The first line has to be the juries. So long as we have juries that are willing to give out large judgments in cases such as this we will have litigants and attorneys willing to take their chances. Remember this the next time you get a jury summons.
I say one cannot sue over something when that person is doing something illegal. Then again, I guess you cannot use the wordr in Scrabble(r) because it is no longer in the dictionary!
quote:Naturally the judge threw the case out of court.
Naturally? Not many judges like that one.
