Strechii wrote:
I'm suprised she could even get a lawyer. This case is so superfluous.
No offense to any PPTers who are legitimate lawyers out there--and, let me preface this by saying, I am married to a lawyer and I went to Northwestern Law School (never took the bar because I had my daugher instead). But, I am not surprised that she was able to find a lawyer to represent her.
There are many legitimate cases out there in which an attorney represents a client who has suffered as the result of a company's negligence. The company did something wrong and is clearly at fault--for example, the McDonald's coffee case where the coffee was 40 degrees hotter than the stuff you drink at home and hot enough so that, if it spilled on you, you could get a third degree burn from it. The McDonald execs knew this but didn't lower the temperature because they wanted the coffee to stay hot until the person buying it got to work or wherever they were going in their car. Or the cases where people have died in car accidents because something on the car was faulty, the company knew about it, but did nothing to correct it.
But, there are also many attorneys out there (some of whom I have worked for) who "chase ambulances" for a living. They know that the case doesn't hold water but they take it anyway. They file lawsuits with no intention of ever going to trial but rather to put endless pressure on the company being sued to settle out of court. Because, even if they settle out of court, they still get to deduct their 35-40% contingency fee (plus all costs) from the amount of the settlement check--the client gets whatever is left.
Once they file the lawsuit, they file document after document after document. All of which have to be read and responded to by the company's attorney, who is charging the company for his/her time on an hourly basis. Many companies settle out of court even if they know the lawsuit is weak because the cost to pay their attorneys to defend them in court would be astronomical and also because they don't want the bad publicity that a trial could give them.
The company does have the right to claim that the lawsuit is frivolous (meaning the company broke no laws and the person filing the lawsuit knows it), which can get the case dismissed and even can force the person to pay the company's court costs. Some companies do that for the really outrageous claims, but I would venture to say that most settle out of court--just to be done with it.
it will be interesting to see what happens with this lawsuit against Neopets.
Tested made this fabulous set for me!!! Isn't it great?