Litigation

Why can’t we all just golf along?

At issue today is an article about a golfer who sued another for getting hit by a stray golf ball.

A member of one of Hong Kong’s most exclusive golf clubs is suing a fellow player after a stray ball hit him on the head. – [Yahoo/AFP]

It used to be, that with an accident like this, you could simply apologize for the stray ball, have a good laugh about it, and all would be forgiven. Now you end up in court? What is the world coming to?

Teed-off golfer sues over stray shot – [Yahoo/AFP]

Tags: , , ,

Saturday, July 21st, 2007 Uncategorized No Comments

Church payout for Perverted Priests…

The LA Archdiocese has settled an ongoing sexual abuse case for a rather obscene amount of money, being the latest in a series of church settlements related to behavior unbecoming persons of the cloth:

The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles and the plaintiffs reached the deal Saturday, said Ray Boucher, the lead plaintiff’s attorney. The archdiocese and the plaintiffs will release a statement Sunday morning and hold a news conference Monday, he said.

An anonymous source with knowledge of the deal placed its value at $660 million, by far the largest payout in the church’s sexual abuse scandal. The source spoke on condition of anonymity because the settlement had not been officially announced. – [Yahoo/AP]

Now I am certainly not one to find fault with the church, but there are a couple of questions in my mind that I think need to be asked. First, why are these people suing the church, as opposed to the specific members of the clergy that abused them? I believe that it is fairly widely accepted that the responsible parties were in fact priests, acting on their own, who were clearly not following the principles of the faith they had decided to follow. Why has the church, as a whole, been made the target of the class action suit? Shouldn’t the individual priests who committed these crimes be liable? Why not prosecute them individually?

If one person sexually assaults another, say a co-worker, in the office building where they work, the victim should file charges against the individual. Not the company where they worked. Why would it be any different for a church? It is not my intention to make light of the suffering of any rape victim, and I don’t have all of the details of any specific case, but it seems to me that suing the church instead of the accused parties is motivated by the desire to sue the party with the most money, and not the person who committed the crime. In other words, the victims greed is getting the better of them.

The fact that the criminals may have been priests does not, in this bloggers humble opinion, make the church liable. And it is has become a rather irritating fact that, in our litigious society, it has become an acceptable practice to take money when we have been wronged, in lieu of justice. This is a mistake people. We are eroding the values of our society by telling criminals they can buy their way out of a crime!

Wake up America!! having that extra money in the bank may be nice, but the only thing that will satisfy is your greed. Not your honor, not your integrity, and certainly not justice. There is no equivalent cash value for justice or honor! And if you think that these are empty words, that won’t put food on your plate, look at the sorry state of our society. Kids killing kids, rapists in our churches, trillions wasted on wars and conflicts that shouldn’t have happened, every one for themselves and at worship before the altar of the mighty dollar. You think all of that is unrelated? Think again.

Yet another point of contention for me is that, while I applaud the archdiocese for standing by their clergy, a settlement seems like an act of evasion. It doesn’t really solve anything. The ones who have been abused do not see justice done, the abusers are never punished, and the falsely accused will walk around with this incident over their heads for the rest of their lives, even though they did nothing. All that happens is that money changes hands. Again with that blasted money! It doesn’t seem right.

If you were raped, would $1 million be sufficient for you to keep your mouth shut and let your rapist walk free? May be even to rape again? And should it be any different if the rapist is a priest? We can only hope that the church is capable of discerning the innocent from the guilty, and helping the “weak of flesh” get counseling and help where needed. But considering that these events happened right under their noses, my “faith” in the church, as it were, is not particularly strong right now.

L.A. archdiocese to pay $660M for abuse – [Yahoo/AP]

Tags: , , , , ,

Sunday, July 15th, 2007 Uncategorized No Comments

This Lawsuit Stinks…

Just read another example of what I consider an abuse of a perfectly good law:

Susan McBride’s lawsuit, filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Detroit, says the work environment is in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. She wants a ban on such scents at work — and unspecified damages. – [Yahoo/AP]

I have one question. Since when did having an overly sensitive nose become a disability? Is an allergy to dust and pollen a disability? Should allergic folk now be able to sue companies to ensure that nearby plants do not produce pollen during allergy season? Ok, so that was three questions, with (maybe) an unfair example.

But I still don’t see how anyone should be able to sue a company because someone elses’ perfume makes them sick. That, to me, is like setting the office thermostat at 90degrees and making everyone else sweat it out just because your arthritic knee flares up when temp gets below 85. It’s inconsiderate and selfish. It’s your problem. Don’t make it everyone else’s. And using the law to do so only makes it more heinous in my book.

Eau de Lawsuit: Woman sues over scent – [Yahoo/AP]

Tags: , , , ,

Thursday, July 5th, 2007 Uncategorized No Comments

Can’t Buy Love… But you can steal it?

I just ran into yet another law that completely misses the point. Apparently an Illinois man won a suit against a man whom he accused of stealing his wife’s affections:

Arthur Friedman used a little-known state law to mount the legal attack against Blinov. The alienation of affection law, one of eight across the country, lets spouses seek damages for the loss of love. – [Yahoo/AP]

OK, this just seems wrong to me on a myriad of levels. First of all, how is it possible to legally “steal” someones affections? And how exactly does the “thief” become liable? I understand the concept of one man stealing another mans wife in an emotional context, but as a suable offense it doesn’t seem right. To start of with, legally, a marriage is a contract between a man and his wife, not a third party. If she cheats on you with a third party, she has broken the contract, not the third party.

It seems to me that as a husband, it would simply be petty to blame a third party for your wife leaving you. It’s not like women are brainless creatures that must be protected from the advances of others because they have no will of their own. She was fully aware of what she was doing, and she knowingly decided to break her vows, not the guy who pursued her, even if he is a real jerk for doing so. If anything, the wife should have been sued. If not for the fact that I have seen even stupider laws on the books, It would amaze me that such a law existed. I’m no legal or social science genius but my guess would be that this law was written in considerably more chauvinistic times.

But even more silly than that ridiculous law, is the fact that, if my understanding of the article is correct, this was apparently a “swinging” couple, and (if we are to believe the testimony of a cheatin’ wife) it sounds as if it was Mr. Friedman who persuaded Mrs. Friedman to start “swinging” as a means to spice up their sex life! Honestly, none of this makes sense to me. First, If a couple is having marital problems, their first solution should be to TALK, openly and honestly to EACH OTHER about them! Maybe get counseling. Sleeping with third parties, while it may sound like a good idea to some, is rarely a good solution, as this couple found out!!

Now I’d be the last person to judge anothers life style. I’m sure many couples find that swinging spices up their sex life. I’ve actually even read of cases where it made the marriage stronger. But regardless of what activities a married couple engages in, I am fairly certain that they worked best when these couples were in a secure, honest and open marriage to begin with, and they came to the decision to do these activities TOGETHER. This couple apparently did the opposite. And then started pointing fingers and blaming others for the result. Typical.

[In my best "Bernie Mac" impression]

Listen up America! You need to start taking responsibility for your actions! Stop abusing and hiding behind all these stupid laws and deal with each other like real, honest, thinking, feeling human beings!! Stop being greedy and selfish and petty, and maybe you won’t have so many problems to begin with!! Aaaiight! I’m out! Peace Out America!
[/Bernie Mac]

Werd…

Illinois man files suit over lost love – [Yahoo/AP]

Tags: , , , , ,

Monday, July 2nd, 2007 Uncategorized No Comments

Please leave these two fields as-is:

Protected by Invisible Defender. Showed 403 to 17,635 bad guys.

May 2012
M T W T F S S
« Feb    
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  
SEO Powered by Platinum SEO from Techblissonline