@Barkydog If you spill the hot coffee on your lap, you’ll have to figure out a way to sue yourself
@db4960 If I sue myself do I get to keep the commision? Remembering one lawsuit, family won millions. Driver too drunk to drive made his wife without a license drive, went off the road into a detention pond, child drowned, no guardrail CA pays.
Tort law needs changing SOOOOOOO desperately.
My favorite is many decades old, from when I was in ND. Some guys from Minnesota went out mudding in their 4-wheelers. One got stuck. His buddy attached a nylon strap from the stuck vehicle’s J-hook in the front and to is own rear bumper. While trying to pull the stuck 4WD out, the strap stretched, the J-hook broke off, and it went as if from a slingshot right through the guy’s rear window, hitting him in the back of the head and causing severe brain injury.
He sued the owner of the land (whose permission he did NOT have to be there), the maker of the nylon strap, and the maker of the J-hook… turns out that the J-hook’s four bolt holes did not coincide with his truck frame’s so he just put it on with two bolts… undersized even.
If I recall correctly, he lost the lawsuit of the property owner, but won the suit against the J-hook manufacturer on the theory that if the manufacturer was going to sell this J-hook without specifying an application, he was negligent in not providing sufficient mounting capability for all 4WD-capable vehicles. I don’t recall how he made out with the strap manufacturer.
As Mr. Bumbles said in “Oliver Twist”, “the law is a ass”.
Sometimes stupid pays, evidently, sure I have a cordless cigarette lighter in my car, but the lighter free from the gas station, “Do not use near fire or flame” suppose that would cover anything if taken to court. I mean lighter, light, whoops put it out I read the warning!
“He sued the owner of the land”
Considering he did not have permission do even be there . . . this guy has no sense of right and wrong
Well, it’s probably the guy’s wife and/or his lawyer that have no sense of right and wrong, because if this guy has brain injury, he’s probably not the one making decisions anymore
yeah, the legal system definitely needs some “tweaking”
Yeah, you don’t have to be on someones land legally to be held liable for injuries. That’s why you’ve got to have insurance.
Suing is one thing - actually winning a case is different.
Two years ago I was at a red-light in Salem NH. The guy on front of me was in a hurry and ran the red-light…I moved up to the head of the line…the guy behind me moved up and stopped…the woman behind him moved up but ran into the back of his truck.
She SUED me - saying that I caused her to think that the light had changed and that I never should have pulled forward. She even hired a lawyer…I guess trying to scare me.
The judge threw the case out…and wasn’t pleased with the lawyer or the woman.
Your story @MikeInNH is a good example why the laws need to be tweaked. You lost time, travel, and maybe a little piece of mind. People that bring these frivolous suits should be made to pay your expenses with a hefty fine right then and there for bringing a frivolous suit.
Maybe they should be made to pay a deposit just to bring the suit. Then when the judge deems it frivolous, the clerk of courts cuts you a check right there.
You, walking away with $1000 would be a little justification for you.
I know the down side is the poor person with a legitimate claim, but they have no way of getting together that $1000 deposit.
Yosemite
People that bring these frivolous suits should be made to pay your expenses with a hefty fine right then and there for bringing a frivolous suit.
It’s not just people…it’s businesses.
Some 40+ years ago Burger King was moving across the country and moved into this small mid-western town. In this town was this diner which had a slogan “King of Burgers”. The diner and slogan was around a good 3-4 decades before Burger King. Burger King sued them. The diner spent thousands of dollars defending themselves…and ended up going out of business before it even wen to court.
Most recent frivolous case was Monsanto vs Oakhurst dairy. Oakhurst dairy had labeled their milk saying that it doesn’t contain any artificial growth hormone (which Monsanto makes and sells). Monsanto’s reason for the suit was that it makes people think that the growth hormone is bad. The label just said they weren’t using it…absolutely nothing about if it was good or bad.
Agree’d Mike, I meant “people” as a general term including Businesses and even government.
Yosemite
oh, gosh, I better mix up my phraseology!
Done!
cdaquila simulation program rule 1 (amended):
SearchThread(((SearchPost(InString,CarRelated) == False)>3), PostReply(Message[randomize]));
Message[0]= “Hi - would you mind making this thread a little more car-related? Thanks.”
Message[1]= “Would you mind bringing this back to something car-related? Thanks.”
Message[2]= “We’re drifting from cars, please bring it back around? Thanks.”
Message[3]= “Please bring this back to a car topic. Thanks.”
The First Porsche Sedan Was A Studebaker
Porsche’s first four-door wasn’t the Panamera, or even their four-door prototype from the ‘90s. Porsche actually built a prototype sedan for Studebaker called the Type 542 back in 1952. It was too weird for production
The front reminds me of a VW
Once upon a time,we always stopped at a local “Fast Break” for early morning breakfast on the way to the job,after running the gamut of the press of people around the coffee pots,taking a lot of extra time ,due to people carefully adding the the little servings of candy" to thier "Brew"I noticed the local VDOT “Heros” getting free overpriced coffee,so I inquired(being on a budget and all) as to where the “free” coffee pot was(after all these “Heros” had cost our company several thousand dollars in fines(,for minor infractions).I was told there were some suspicious looking characters around(or something like that and the “troopers had scared them off) and I guess they won perpetual free coffee,because they worked for the state.
In the immortal words of “Jimmy Dean”-“Dance with the one that brung ya” so I generally dont frequent that establishment as often as I used to(besides they dont have"krispy Kremes” anymore)
Re: cars and donuts – Ah, long ago college days. Unusually heavy snow storm brought Tulsa to a standstill. Power out all across campus. Students huddled by dozens in the dorm’s parlor for warmth in numbers. Donuts. We needed donuts. A blizzard of donuts. Money collection with everyone chipping in. Seven of us trudge through snow drifts to one girl’s car. She was from a Nebraska cattle ranch. She had a shovel in the car trunk we used to dig out the car. Two crazy college kids in front with five in back seat for weight. Drive through deep snow with no other cars on road except for one lonely cop who did not look pleased to see us. Bought out the entire morning’s supply at Winchell’s Donuts (known locally on campus as St. Winchell’s Cathedral) at 75% discount as the proprietor figured we would be the day’s only customers. Car trunk filled with donut boxes and more in the car such we could hardly fit seven crazy college kids and all donuts in the car. Happy motoring back to campus with our trusty driver unfazed by deeeeeep snow on road as nothing compared to driving across open cattle range back home in her native Nebraska winters. Passed the same cop again with us happily waving boxes marked Winchell’s Donuts and yelling offers to share our donut haul with him. Poor cop looked in disbelief then literally shook his head in despair and mock banged his head on the steering wheel. As this is a family friendly forum I shall omit quoting his specific injunction to get off the roads. {
@Barkydog – What about the Type 542 prototype was too weird for production??? Just curious.
This is a pretty good summary, I think:
http://www.studebaker-info.org/porsstud.html
In my opinion, it could have been developed into a very competitive vehicle, but the biggest problem was that Studebaker’s very meager resources at that point only allowed for the face-lifting of their existing designs, with no possibility of raising the financing necessary to make that Porsche practical enough for production.
Thank you @VDCdriver . Very informative.
^
Here is a lot more info on the aborted Type 542 project:
The previous website failed to mention what would definitely have been considered weird in The US at that time, namely a rear engine. And, that rear engine was undoubtedly the main reason why John Delorean commented about the car’s marked tendency toward oversteer.
That makes me ask, have other rear engine cars also tended to oversteer?