Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

LVAUGHNZ t1_ix5fy1d wrote

Reply to comment by sighthoundman in Jack Daniel’s asks Supreme Court to hear dog toy dispute. Will they bite? by WREGnewschannel3

You can at least agree that some of them are obviously frivilous right? I worked at a court deposition office years ago and we had a lady paying out the ass trying to sue the US gov because "the poor relations with North Korea was causing her stress".

1

themehboat t1_ix63htl wrote

Just out of curiosity, what did she want us to do about it?

2

LVAUGHNZ t1_ix695ps wrote

I dont know I didn't really read it, she just wanted money and proclaimed the stress that her family was living there was causing health issues and she tried to cash in on past "damages" and future "damages". I was in charge of scanning all the printed documents to make digital and physical copies and I rarely read the text. There was one where some smaller company was suing blizzard for allegedly copying their netcode for world of warcraft. Sometimes it was horrific car accidents with pictures from the scene.

2

themehboat t1_ix69uyj wrote

That’s a pretty idiotic way to try to get a windfall.

1

Nop277 t1_ix75y4b wrote

Idk if it was related but that reminds me of that time some company sued not just Blizzard but pretty much every MMO claiming they had a copyright on any system where someone communicates via text in a game. The litigants were known copyright trolls and I'm pretty sure it got chucked out.

1

sighthoundman t1_ix6d1y7 wrote

No doubt. I can sue Greg Abbott because he signed a bill that causes me emotional distress.

The state of Texas employs tons of lawyers. (Literally. A ton of lawyers is somewhere between 20 and 40 people.) They go to the office and work. It costs Texas literally nothing to file a motion for dismissal and the fact that I, with no formal legal training, can think of six reasons to dismiss this case without even stretching my mental muscles, means that the lawyers can probably think of 60. Their motion will be granted, and the case will (I hope: I've heard bad things about Texas judges, which I'm sure are entirely fabricated) be dismissed "with prejudice". (That means I can't bring the same lawsuit again.)

But one of my favorite examples of a "frivolous lawsuit" is the Stella Liebeck (McDonald's coffee) case. She asked originally for her medical bills to be covered. (Because they had done it for previous burn victims from spilled coffee, they had already established that they knew the coffee was dangerous and they were liable for injuries.) They refused, so she sued. Her lawyer convinced the jury that the appropriate award was "3 days' coffee sales". (Apparently logic is not required in courtrooms.) $105 million. Whatever the final settlement was (it's sealed), we do know that it did not involve the lawyer working for free, and it was less than $105 million.

Was that lawsuit frivolous? (For any foreign readers, hospital treatment in the US is far from free. There is essentially no chance of a company being put out of business, or an executive jailed, for safety violations. The only downside to bad behavior is lawsuits. It's essentially private enforcement of the laws.)

1