image creditSome people, whether out of greed or sheer ignorance, push the boundaries of acceptability and clog the legal system with outrageous lawsuits.
Whether it's a convict who sues himself or an unsatisfied beer drinker who blames the company for his lack of dates, our verdict is: Case dismissed!
(thanks Jessie)
1 comment(s):
I recall the story of a guy who was injured falling from his motorcycle and sued Bell helmets. The problems with this suit were many. Firsltly he suffered no head injuries. Secondly police could find no helmet or evidence of one at the crash scene. Thirdly the rider admitted he had not fastened the strap. And finally he had no evidence that the helmet he had been wearing was actually a Bell.
His only reason for suing Bell? He recalled that the salesman from whom he had bought the helmet had told him it was the best money could buy, he reasoned in his suit that the helmet must have been a Bell. Some kind of back handed complement, right?
The question is however why did he choose to sue the alleged manufacturer of his alleged helmet? At least he could prove he was riding a motorcycle and that motorcycle had tyres, why not sue the manufacturer of either of those? Why not sue the highway authority? Why not sue anybody other than somebody he couldn't even prove had any involvement in the crash or his injuries?
Post a Comment