Guest guest Posted May 10, 2006 Report Share Posted May 10, 2006 Lawsuits prevail when the defendant has failed to adequately protect the victim from harm - i.e. they have been negligent to the detriment of the injured party. When kids are involved, the parents have to account to the court for the money and the funds are placed in blocked accounts where it is inaccessible to the parents except under unusual circumstances and then only under close court supervision. The parents, in spite of their hopes to the contrary, don't get to spend it as their own. Whatever plans they may have, the judge has another plan - to protect the money for the kids. The judge generally wins out. Best - Nick _____ From: DS_Friends_Keshishian [mailto:DS_Friends_Keshishian ] On Behalf Of mjs93311 Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 3:09 AM To: DS_Friends_Keshishian Subject: law suits you guys are creeping me out! I don't believe in lawsuits. When you are injured in a store the business pays for your medical treatment. I have had people come in and gloat that their child got hurt and they were planning a suit and spending the money and it wasn't on the child, trust me. It really turned my off to law suits. Marta a bit sensitive, don't you know! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 10, 2006 Report Share Posted May 10, 2006 Thanks, Nick. I never thought that the family would win, I was just offended by their jubulence over their injured child and similar things I have witnessed. Being a physician, I am sensitive to the issue of lawsuits. On the other hand, I believe in hiring an attourney whenever one goes to court, I think it pays for itself in the end. Marta > the judge has another plan - to protect the money for the kids. The judge > generally wins out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 10, 2006 Report Share Posted May 10, 2006 In a message dated 5/10/2006 1:51:15 P.M. Central Daylight Time, shyquietsue@... writes: She has decided that it's not okay to sue because you were in an accident that was someone else's fault...but it MIGHT BE okay to acquire legal representation for injuries that might hurt for a long time or forever. Capitalist sow that she is... __________________________________________________________ The biggest problem with lawsuits are proving lasting damage. My car wreck occurred when a jeep was being beared down on by a semi and it was hit me or hit the semi. My van looked like the lesser of 2 evils. State farm was their insurance and they called me while I was on pain meds 2 days later and refused to pay a dime on the claim because of something(God only knows what) that I said while on heavy duty meds. They said the Mysterious semi that only they saw was to blame and we had to get them to pay. Well, I had liability with 500 dollars coverage for medical for us ...no uninsured motorists coverage, and was out of work, out of a van we had just put a new transmission in, and in a hell of a mess. The 2nd attorney we got said we'd have to file in TN (where the wreck occured) and it was possible that because they clipped us in the front, even though it was like a head on collision to us, they might say it was our fault because we hit the back of their car. They admitted fault at the scene. BTW if you ever want a sturdy car. Buy a Jeep wrangler. That damned jeep not only totaled my dodge van, but drove away with all 4 occupants without a scratch, and no damage to the visible eye. Anyway we ended up on the wrong end of the stick. Mel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 10, 2006 Report Share Posted May 10, 2006 When our kid was moving to her first post-college apartment, her Volvo became the ham in a sandwich because the car in front of her was legally stopped to make a left turn and the car behind her was too busy with her kid to put her foot on the brake of her SUV. that volvo was wrinkled everywhere a Volvo is supposed to wrinkle! When I suggested our daughter call my cousin the attorney, she called us capatalist swine and cited such lawsuits as the reason our generation was screwed up. Then she got the flu or something and every place that had been injured in the accident hurt like an SOB and she asked for the cousin's phone number. (We alos noted that she was thoroughly PTSD'd behind automobile occupancy issues and would not ride in her best friend's Miata or any other smaller car.) She has decided that it's not okay to sue because you were in an accident that was someone else's fault...but it MIGHT BE okay to acquire legal representation for injuries that might hurt for a long time or forever. Capitalist sow that she is... > > Thanks, Nick. I never thought that the family would win, I was just > offended by their jubulence over their injured child and similar > things I have witnessed. Being a physician, I am sensitive to the > issue of lawsuits. On the other hand, I believe in hiring an > attourney whenever one goes to court, I think it pays for itself in > the end. > > Marta > > > > the judge has another plan - to protect the money for the kids. The > judge > > generally wins out. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 11, 2006 Report Share Posted May 11, 2006 In a message dated 5/10/2006 5:10:21 A.M. Central Daylight Time, mjs93311@... writes: I have had people come in and gloat that their child got hurt and they were planning a suit and spending the money and it wasn't on the child, trust me. It really turned my off to law suits. Marta a bit sensitive, don't you know ___________________________ Marta, It just isn't about docs either. My Grandmother bought my aunt a house about 12 yrs ago. She bought it cheap and fixed it up. Sherry had an abusive Sob for a hubby so She wouldn't put the house in Sherry's name. Sherry paid a " mortgage/rent to own of 99 a month just as a token but usually didn't pay. Anyway she bought a Part pit bull dog who was a " Big baby " Well one day her daughter(my cousin) was baby sitting this 8 yr old kid and was banging on the door and the dog went bezerk and attacked the kid causing damage to the eye. Sherry had been warned and My daughter was about 7 and had been snapped at and wasn't allowed around the house because of the dog. Anyway, Sherry didn't have a pot to pee in and the people knew it but they found out my grandmother had my granddaddy's retirement where he cashed out and the daddy of the little boy went around town bragging that he was fixing to get a windfall. The court made them give the family about 20 K total and huge chunk of their money that they were using to live on. I thought it was so unfair because they didn't own the dog or have any say so but were punished for helping their daughter out. Mel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 14, 2006 Report Share Posted May 14, 2006 Hi Marta, I agree that we are suit-happy in this country. If I had something like that happen to me and the company was willing to pay for the medical, etc. WITHOUT the threat of a suit, I'm sure I would accept that. As long as the accident didn't cause any permanent damage. If that happens, I believe it's a whole different situation. Tracey > > you guys are creeping me out! I don't believe in lawsuits. When you > are injured in a store the business pays for your medical treatment. > I have had people come in and gloat that their child got hurt and they > were planning a suit and spending the money and it wasn't on the > child, trust me. It really turned my off to law suits. > > Marta > a bit sensitive, don't you know! > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.