Ok, often when folks post threads complaining about idiotic lawsuits, I’ll take a wait and see, it might not be as idiotic as that 10 second sound bite says.
not this time Ok, I have cats, I’ve loved my kitties and would be really really pissed if I traveled w/one and the airline lost it.
but five fucking million dollars for a tabby cat? We’re not talking a pedigreed feline where there might have been some monetary damages to the loss. Or a trained animal that has movie/tv roles. A Garden variety pet.
Now, the airline may in fact have been negligent, and if so, I can see demanding payments (and no, not the $7 replacement for a cat, I can get behind some level of ‘learn from your mistake’ payment). But not five million.
Is there a way that the attorney can be fined for inflationary bullshit lawsuit???
[sub]and do I still get to keep my seat in the 'liberal but not a fucking lunatic ’ section?[/sub]
wring: *Now, the airline may in fact have been negligent, and if so, I can see demanding payments (and no, not the $7 replacement for a cat, I can get behind some level of ‘learn from your mistake’ payment). But not five million. *
It’s an unfortunately common error to imagine that if you’re liberal, particularly if you’re a liberal opposed to the more egregious proposals for “tort reform”, you can’t be outraged by lunatic excess in litigation. Do not fall for this mistake!
Personally, I’ve always felt that big-ticket punitive damages, if sought, should be awarded to a recipient other than any of the plaintiffs, completely detached from the lawsuit. And hey, looks like the plaintiffs in this case would agree with me:
Mmm-hmmm. Well then, Mr. Wysotski, how’s about we increase the attention to the problem by awarding that five million bucks, with great publicity, to the SPCA or an animal shelter or another such organization? You and the other plaintiff can get a modest sum to cover your time and trouble and legal costs, the airline will get a nice hefty financial disincentive to be so careless about the animal handling next time, lots of suffering doggies and kitties will be benefited, and your “emotional distress” will be sweetly mitigated by the consciousness of having done some good in the world. So much more healing and sustaining than a mere wad of crass old money, don’t you agree?
Says the attorney is David Blatte, the guy who represented the negligent owners of the dog that killed the San Francisco gal when they tried to keep their dog from being put down.
I know what you mean. I’m a long time liberal too, and it just drives me crazy how many ludicrous lawsuits are filed. They tie up the legal system and make it harder for legitimate complainants to get a shot at justice.
In this case I can see a suit, but the amount is absurd. Even considering that any judge would be likely to reduce the award, it just seems like another chance for somebody (cough lawyer cough) to cash in on somebody else’s distress.
A “Garden variety pet”? What a crass way to put it.
And it’s not about the money. We know that because the injured party told us so. “It’s not about the money,” Wysotski said.
It’s about Canadians, and their devil-may-care attitude towards Life.
In the relevant jurisdiction (or in the US in general if you can generalize) do you have rules of court regarding what we would call “Formal Offers”?
Here, if my clients is hit with a suit where we think that we have liability but the amount claimed is ludicrous, the first thing we would do is make a “Formal Offer” for a sensible (or even just slightly generous) amount. Under our rules, if that offer is not accepted, and if at trial the claimaint does no better than the offer, they will become liable to pay our legal costs probably on an indemnity basis, from the date of offer.
What say you, wring?
(and by the way the action against the manufacturer of the neighbour’s ride-on mower due to the incident with the trans-pacific beer can is going well, thanks).
Cite? I’m pretty convinced this is a bunch of bullshit mouthed by tort reformers; any numbers I’ve ever seen suggest that there’s no such logjam in the court system. In other words, you’re just repeating propaganda.
All lawsuits cost money to adjudicate. Ludicrous lawsuits should not be wasting the people’s money. Many courtrooms are too busy already and getting rid of a few lawsuits would mean better service and justice for the others.
In my view plaintiffs should be entitled to compensatory damages only and all punitive damages should go to the state.
I would love to see this go to trial, and the jury find for the plaintif.
And award them seven dollars for a new cat. Nothing more.
Man, that would be sweet.
mrs jjimm and I had a minor disagreement about this last night, regarding our beloved Cookie Monster.
I told her that for Cookie’s sake, she’d better hope it was she that answered the door when the guy with the 5 million bucks came round…
On a serious note, I quite agree with sailor re. punitive versus compensatory damages. Litigation is way out of hand in Ireland already, and is getting worse in the UK too. In a lot of cases it’s driven by greed. Insurance costs are going through the roof, which ss bad for free enterprise, especially in the small- to medium-sized business sector.
Five million seems like a lot. If it had happened to me I would go for as much money as possible, however. Not because of the money but because I would want to do injury to the airline. Frankly thinking of someone’s negligence causing the frightening death of one of my cats (I damned sure the cat was terrified, alone, probably crushed by luggage or equipment. and even if it wasn’t I’d think so which is just as bad on an emotional level) I would want to do murder to whomever I could lay the blame on.
So the five mil wouldn’t even begin to cover it really, but it may distract me from killing whomever my enraged mind could target. I’d want to see the employees sobbing uncrollably, shuddering and gasping with frightend and confused looks in their eyes and I unload 12 gauge slugs into the heads of their co-workers at random, my face covered with blood and viscera. A visage of impending death and revenge. Maybe I’d get bored with the quick kills that head shots provide and I’d just take limbs off at the major joints and let folks bleed out. I have heard that sometimes frightened animals will gnaw on themselves out of desperation. What fun it would be to make the airline employees suck the marrow from their own limbs I had just blown off, for the promis of a quick death.
So, yeah I think facing my counter proposal the five million would seem like a fair deal.
It’s short for: I was dumb enough to voulinteer for it, and young enough to enjoy it, and now I’m old and sentimental enough to feel proud of it.
As you can see “D.F.A.” really cuts down on my typing load. All kidding aside it’s an abbreviation of an Airborne slogan “Death From Above”, which is somewhat ironic when my own medical chart surrounding my last jump is concerned.
Here is a better story on the circumstances surrounding the cat’s dissapearance.
So, it seems to me that the airline misrepresented the manner in which the animals would be handled, reacted poorly when the situation turned ugly, and that this is yet another incident in a long line of animal deaths. Add to that the horridly insulting “$14 a pound liability” and I’m pretty disgusted.
I don’t think they should get 5 mil. and I doubt they will, but I’m entirely behind their lawsuit. They trusted the airline based on a lie, and it cost them a pet they obviously loved.
I want to see MORE and MORE of these type of lawsuits filed! Hopefully, the courts will just grind to a halt, and the whole thing will collapse…then we can (sans lawyers) figure out how to:
-reform the whole Tort system (it is medieval in concept)
-remove lawyers from the process
-establish common sense insurance systems against losses
-set up arbitration boards to deal with uninsurable losses
So, much good may come of this!
