This matter would be between the 2 parties involved, not you.
I had asked my insurance agent a hypothetical question regarding something along these lines and was told that "that is what they have car insurance for" and that we should never state anything or show any emotion or guilt. But as someone else pointed out - in this sue happy world we live in today, anyone can be sued for anything (or nothing) so protect yourself (and your B&B) as much as you can..
Copperhead said:
But as someone else pointed out - in this sue happy world we live in today, anyone can be sued for anything (or nothing) so protect yourself (and your B&B) as much as you can.
I don't know why this fallacy keeps getting perpetuated by very smart people.
According to actual court filing records in all districts in America, civil lawsuit rates have not only dropped in the last couple decades, but have never surpassed the "sue happy" days of the late 1870's when they peaked.
Yes, thats the 1870's
Thank you sensationalist TV reporting and powerful anti-tort forces for keeping the fire alive on this cannard.
.
Tim_Toad_HLB said:
Copperhead said:
But as someone else pointed out - in this sue happy world we live in today, anyone can be sued for anything (or nothing) so protect yourself (and your B&B) as much as you can.
I don't know why this fallacy keeps getting perpetuated by very smart people.
According to actual court filing records in all districts in America, civil lawsuit rates have not only dropped in the last couple decades, but have never surpassed the "sue happy" days of the late 1870's when they peaked.
Yes, thats the 1870's
Thank you sensationalist TV reporting and powerful anti-tort forces for keeping the fire alive on this cannard.
I'm going to sue you for saying that!!!!
I think it gets perpetuated by stories like the woman who split hot coffee on herself then sued McDonalds and won.
.
Proud Texan said:
I'm going to sue you for saying that!!!!
I think it gets perpetuated by stories like the woman who split hot coffee on herself then sued McDonalds and won.
Make my day!
What got very very little ink or press coverge about that case was the final award was about 10% of the original judgment.
A positive that did come out of it was that a giant corporation who made a policy decision to serve super heated coffee many degrees above the "normal" for coffee in flimsy, uninsulated paper cups being passed out a drive through window to people reaching through a car window now serves its coffee in better insulated cups at a temperature that is accepted as "normal".
If Mickie D's latest mass marketed McCafe' coffee line is any evidence, that suit didn't do much to inhibit their ability or desire to offer coffee to its customers.
That case is trotted out by every "tort reform" group out there as an example of why the big corporations and the rich and powerful need even more protection from the commoners.
This stuff has been going on since the advent of legal jurisprudence and I'd hardly sum up the centuries of civil litigation as being slanted in the favor of us little guys.
.
Tim_Toad_HLB said:
Proud Texan said:
I'm going to sue you for saying that!!!!
I think it gets perpetuated by stories like the woman who split hot coffee on herself then sued McDonalds and won.
Make my day!
What got very very little ink or press coverge about that case was the final award was about 10% of the original judgment.
And I wonder just how much the lady got of that 10% - most likely very little after her lawyers share... While you make some good points about how things improved at M.D's it still does not convience me that tort reform is not needed... The only ones that are really winning are the attorneys that are pushing these suits.
.
Copperhead said:
The only ones that are really winning are the attorneys that are pushing these suits.
You seem to be neglecting to note that there are two sets of lawyers in any legal proceeding. The ones protecting the interests of the ultra rich and powerful at the expense of the common interests we all share aren't exactly doing it for free.
Or without enormously high staked motivation to keep things just the way they are.
Sure, we commoners get a crumb thrown our way like some much ballyhoed hot coffee case and it convinces just enough of the gullible and uninformed out there to keep doing the bidding for interests they have absolutely nothing in common with and never will, but that's the beauty of America.
We're all "FREE" to defend a system that protects and insulates folks like Bernie Madoff, Michael Milken and Ivan Boesky until their crimes become so egregious that even they just must be brought to justice and get their little slap on the wrist.
Actually, I think the giant corporations who end up saving enormous amounts of money due to the chilling effect of lopsided tort "reform" are and always have been the big winners.
Do you honestly think that Exxon after having its Valdez fines, penalties and civil judgments slashed to a fraction of what they started out as wasn't ultimately the big winner in that particular case?
How about the 35,000 or so fishermen, tourism related businesses (like small, independently owned, local B&Bs?), etc.. who got a fraction of redress for their actual damages?
And it only took them 20 years and a despoiled environment to find out they were ultimately gonna get the shaft.
Ah, who cares, its better to protect the ultra rich and powerful at all costs.
Cause you just never know when one of us is gonna become a billionaire.
.