Stupid Law Suits

This is our lounge area. Feel free to come in and get acquainted!
User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 23535
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed

Stupid Law Suits

Post by Rob Lister »

The lawsuit states Gertie bought a two-cheeseburger Extra Value Meal from at least five suburban Chicago McDonald's locations in October and November, and each time it was 41 cents more expensive than the a la carte option. He tells WLS-AM that he also went to 25 other McDonald's locations just to compare prices, finding that many were charging the exact same price for the two options. He doesn't think McDonald's should be able to get away with such blatant false advertising, with the lawsuit stating the meal deal is clearly "no ‘value’ at all, let alone an ‘extra value.'" Gertie is seeking reimbursement for all customers "overcharged" for the two-cheeseburger Extra Value Meal.
http://www.newser.com/story/235804/man- ... -isnt.html

Dude, you're getting more value so you should pay 41 cents extra.

If I were the jury, I'd give Mc'd's cost.
User avatar
ed
Posts: 41050
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: G_D

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by ed »

If I were the jury I'd make him eat 25 Big Macs at one sitting them I'd pants him on Park and 42nd st. Then I'd nut kick him.
This space for let
User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 23535
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Rob Lister »

Wow. That's awful extreme. I was just suggesting court costs.
User avatar
ed
Posts: 41050
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: G_D

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by ed »

Then court costs. <spit>
This space for let
User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 29436
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Anaxagoras »

Some older examples:

Man sues Chinese actress over her intense stare in TV show
Reports say the lawsuit filed by a Shanghai man involves the prime-time TV show "Tiger Mom" which debuted in May and centers on a couple's differing approach to raising their daughter. Zhao plays the big-eyed mother who relentlessly pushes her daughter's development, while the father wants his child to have more freedom.

The Legal Daily said the plaintiff was alleging Zhao's stare caused him "spiritual damage."
Nebraska Woman Files Suit Against All Homosexuals

They make the Baby Jesus cry, you know.
A Nebraska woman identifying herself as the "ambassador" for plaintiffs "God and His Son, Jesus Christ," is suing all homosexuals on Earth for breaking "religious and moral laws," according to court records filed Tuesday.

In the suit, entered into the docket as Driskell v. Homosexuals, Sylvia Ann Driskell, 66, of Auburn, Nebraska, asks in a seven-page, neatly handwritten petition (PDF) that U.S. District Judge John M. Gerrard decide once and for all whether homosexuality is or isn't a sin.

The suit doesn't cite any case law under which a judge could make such a determination. In fact, it cites no court cases at all, quoting Webster's Dictionary and numerous Bible verses, instead, to bolster Driskell's central contention, which is:

"That homosexuality is a sin and that they the homosexuals know it is a sin to live a life of homosexuality. Why else would they have been hiding in the closet."

Driskell writes, "I'm sixty six years old, an [sic] I never thought that I would see the day in which our Great Nation or Our Great State of Nebraska would become so compliant to the complicity of some peoples [sic] lewd behavior."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vexatious_litigation
Lawrence Bittaker, who together with his partner Roy Norris was convicted of torturing and murdering five young women in 1979. He filed 40 separate frivolous lawsuits against the state of California, including one claiming "cruel and unusual punishment" after being served a broken cookie. In 1993, he was declared a vexatious litigant and is forbidden from filing lawsuits without the permission of a lawyer or a judge.[39]
Then there was this one:

https://sites.google.com/site/simpsonlitigation/
Complaint

Filed November 14, 2007
Simpson's complaint seeking $20 million in damages for claims of fraud,
misrepresentation, breach of contract, misfeasance, malfeasance, defamation,
intentional infliction of emotional distress, violation of the First Amendment,
violation of the Fourth Amendment, and conspiracy arises out of Simpson's use of
an Internet forum on which Simpson told a tale about being visited by aliens
called ET Corn Gods who advised him that it was his job to determine and share
with the world decoding rules to reveal a hidden language that has been
embedded into the English language by the aforementioned ET Corn Gods.
Simpson claimed that he worked on cracking the code for 22 years.
Not surprisingly, other users of the forum were skeptical of Simpson's claims, and
quickly demonstrated that Simpson's "code" was nonsensical in that any word
could, in fact, be translated into any other word a person chooses, by following the
rules Simpson outlined, thus establishing that Simpson's claims about the code
were untrue.
:P
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare (probably Socrates originally)
User avatar
gnome
Posts: 25900
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:40 am
Location: New Port Richey, FL

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by gnome »

There really are some stupid ones.

I mean really, if a lawyer went with this I would expect them to be laughed out of the courtroom...

Image
"If fighting is sure to result in victory, then you must fight! Sun Tzu said that, and I'd say he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it, and then he perfected it so that no living man could best him in the ring of honor. Then, he used his fight money to buy two of every animal on earth, and then he herded them onto a boat, and then he beat the crap out of every single one. And from that day forward any time a bunch of animals are together in one place it's called a zoo! (Beat) Unless it's a farm!"
--Soldier, TF2
User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 29436
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Anaxagoras »

I don't know if this one is stupid or just weird.
It's France, so I really have no idea about the laws there.

Cheating Frenchman sues Uber for tipping off wife about affair
A businessman in southern France is suing ride-hailing company Uber over his wife's discovery of rides he took to see his lover, his lawyer said.
The man says he once requested an Uber driver from his wife's phone.
Despite logging off, the application continued to send notifications to her iPhone afterwards, revealing his travel history and arousing her suspicions.
The couple have since divorced. The lawsuit is reportedly worth up to €45m ($48m; £38m).
"My client was the victim of a bug in an application," his lawyer David-André Darmon told AFP news agency after the case was lodged at a court in Grasse.
"The bug has caused him problems in his private life," Mr Darmon added.
In the US, I think most software applications make you agree to some terms and conditions just to use their applications. If France is anything like that, he probably agreed to something that limits Uber's liability. Maybe even agreed that Steve Jobs could turn him into a human centipede.
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare (probably Socrates originally)
User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 29436
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Anaxagoras »

Woman who won lottery to sue lottery for ruining her life:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 76356.html
She said she had become bored of relentless consumption and felt like it failed to offered long-term genuine happiness. Before winning the lottery, Ms Park, who now owns two properties, worked as an admin temp for £8 an hour and lived in a small flat with her mum in Edinburgh.

“I thought it would make it 10 times better but it’s made it 10 times worse. I wish I had no money most days. I say to myself, ‘My life would be so much easier if I hadn’t won’,” she told the Sunday People.

“People look at me and think, ‘I wish I had her lifestyle, I wish I had her money.’ But they don’t realise the extent of my stress. I have material things but apart from that my life is empty. What is my purpose in life?”
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare (probably Socrates originally)
User avatar
Grammatron
Posts: 36378
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 1:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Grammatron »

I'll take the existential crisis of her hands, she can just deposit all her moneys in my account.
User avatar
Witness
Posts: 35471
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Witness »

Anaxagoras wrote:I don't know if this one is stupid or just weird.
It's France, so I really have no idea about the laws there.
Dunno about the laws, but I searched for a more informative article: nope. There are dozens of them, but all are copypasta from some Urtext, nothing new.
Best guess it's fake: the plaintiff is never named, even the location remains very vague (and journos love to pinpoint the city, so it has an echo in local press and they can "illustrate" with a meaningless stock photo, e. g. the courthouse).

:dunno:
User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 29436
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Anaxagoras »

Grammatron wrote:I'll take the existential crisis of her hands, she can just deposit all her moneys in my account.
And the funny thing is, she says too much money is her problem, so she is suing for what? More money?

Then again, the Independent is starting to look more and more like Fake News because they took "she is debating whether to sue" and changed it to "she is planning to sue". Also she would give the money to charity if she won, which they don't mention. Doesn't sound like she has talked to a lawyer. Still a funny story even without the added bullshit.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wor ... 0aa2eb3767
The first thing Jane Park bought after winning 1 million British pounds in the EuroMillions lottery in 2013 was a Louis Vuitton handbag.

Then a chihuahua named “Princess.”

Then some shoes.

Then a purple Range Rover and a pair of breast implants.

And then 50 more designer handbags.

“I just went shopping all the time,” the Edinburgh native told the Channel Four Television Corporation.

Then something curious happened: Buying things for the sake of buying things got old. Instead of finding happiness via conspicuous consumption, Park uncovered an age-old maxim preached by holy men for thousands of years and ignored by enthusiastic lottery winners for almost as long: Money can't buy happiness, and large amounts of it have a way of, well, complicating things.
. . .

Park said she thinks that 18 — not 16 — should be the minimum age for winning the lottery. The Daily Record reported that Park is debating whether to sue Camelot — the company that owns EuroMillions — for negligence and donate any potential winnings from that legal action to charity.
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare (probably Socrates originally)
User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 29436
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Anaxagoras »

Someone discovered that a 2x4 isn't actually 2x4 and now they are suing:

(Did anyone here not know that?)

Home Depot, Menards face lawsuits over lumber size description
MILWAUKEE — Two home improvements stores are accused of deceiving the buyers of four-by-four boards, the big brother to the ubiquitous two-by-four.

The alleged deception: Menards and Home Depot (HD) market and sell the hefty lumber as four-by-fours without specifying that the boards actually measure 3½ inches by 3½ inches.

The lawsuits against the retailers would-be class actions, filed within five days of each other in federal court for the Northern District of Illinois. Attorneys from the same Chicago law firm represent the plaintiffs in both cases. Each suit seeks more than $5 million.

“Defendant has received significant profits from its false marketing and sale of its dimensional lumber products,” the action against Menards contends.

“Defendant’s representations as to the dimension of these products were false and misleading,” the suit against Home Depot alleges.
A class action suit. I wonder whose idea this was, the plaintiff(s) (it's a "class") or the law firm?

Imagine if they did succeed. It would drive up the price of lumber, we'd have to cut down more trees, the lumber would be heavier and if it's not structurally necessary, it's just waste. New houses would cost more, etc.
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare (probably Socrates originally)
User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 23535
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Rob Lister »

Anaxagoras wrote:Someone discovered that a 2x4 isn't actually 2x4 and now they are suing:

(Did anyone here not know that?)

Home Depot, Menards face lawsuits over lumber size description
MILWAUKEE — Two home improvements stores are accused of deceiving the buyers of four-by-four boards, the big brother to the ubiquitous two-by-four.

The alleged deception: Menards and Home Depot (HD) market and sell the hefty lumber as four-by-fours without specifying that the boards actually measure 3½ inches by 3½ inches.

The lawsuits against the retailers would-be class actions, filed within five days of each other in federal court for the Northern District of Illinois. Attorneys from the same Chicago law firm represent the plaintiffs in both cases. Each suit seeks more than $5 million.

“Defendant has received significant profits from its false marketing and sale of its dimensional lumber products,” the action against Menards contends.

“Defendant’s representations as to the dimension of these products were false and misleading,” the suit against Home Depot alleges.
A class action suit. I wonder whose idea this was, the plaintiff(s) (it's a "class") or the law firm?

Imagine if they did succeed. It would drive up the price of lumber, we'd have to cut down more trees, the lumber would be heavier and if it's not structurally necessary, it's just waste. New houses would cost more, etc.
This is a loser. The suit confuses the rough green size with the nominal size.
https://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/misc ... b_6409.pdf
And about 150 years of evolution of the standard in the lumber market.

So they need to include every lumber maker in the world in their suit.
User avatar
ed
Posts: 41050
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: G_D

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by ed »

Anaxagoras wrote:Someone discovered that a 2x4 isn't actually 2x4 and now they are suing:

(Did anyone here not know that?)

Home Depot, Menards face lawsuits over lumber size description
MILWAUKEE — Two home improvements stores are accused of deceiving the buyers of four-by-four boards, the big brother to the ubiquitous two-by-four.

The alleged deception: Menards and Home Depot (HD) market and sell the hefty lumber as four-by-fours without specifying that the boards actually measure 3½ inches by 3½ inches.

The lawsuits against the retailers would-be class actions, filed within five days of each other in federal court for the Northern District of Illinois. Attorneys from the same Chicago law firm represent the plaintiffs in both cases. Each suit seeks more than $5 million.

“Defendant has received significant profits from its false marketing and sale of its dimensional lumber products,” the action against Menards contends.

“Defendant’s representations as to the dimension of these products were false and misleading,” the suit against Home Depot alleges.
A class action suit. I wonder whose idea this was, the plaintiff(s) (it's a "class") or the law firm?

Imagine if they did succeed. It would drive up the price of lumber, we'd have to cut down more trees, the lumber would be heavier and if it's not structurally necessary, it's just waste. New houses would cost more, etc.
As I recall from my days as a lumberjack, the dimensions are those of green wood, before drying.

eta whoops, I see Rob answered this. Ill leave my answer because it is better.
This space for let
User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 29436
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Anaxagoras »

The law firm must have a theory though about how this will put money in their pockets. Do they think they have enough of a case that these companies will offer a settlement just to make them go away and stop bothering them?
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare (probably Socrates originally)
User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 23535
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Rob Lister »

Anaxagoras wrote:The law firm must have a theory though about how this will put money in their pockets. Do they think they have enough of a case that these companies will offer a settlement just to make them go away and stop bothering them?
https://topclassactions.com/tag/home-de ... n-lawsuit/
It appears they are used to going to court. But usually for valid reasons. I don't think they'll settle.
User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 23535
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Rob Lister »

On going to Lowes website, this is what I find
Image

Home Depot lists it in the specifications
Common: 2 in. x 4 in. x 8 ft.; Actual: 1.5 in. x 3.5 in. x 96 in.
User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 23535
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Rob Lister »

Abdul Alhazred wrote:Maybe the lawyer isn't taking it on contingency.

Maybe the poor aggrieved sucker, after having been told it's a loser by other more ethical lawyers, still wants JUSTICE!
I'll be a bit honest and say that most folks don't know of that difference until they do their first DIY project. Still, when one says 2x4 and another hears 2"x4", that's their fault. Imagining dimensions where none exist.
User avatar
ed
Posts: 41050
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: G_D

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by ed »

Rob Lister wrote:On going to Lowes website, this is what I find
Image

Home Depot lists it in the specifications
Common: 2 in. x 4 in. x 8 ft.; Actual: 1.5 in. x 3.5 in. x 96 in.
Note that my answer does not have to rely on visual aids, it stands on its own. That is why it is better
This space for let
User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 23535
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Rob Lister »

Yours is better. But can you make wood?
User avatar
gnome
Posts: 25900
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:40 am
Location: New Port Richey, FL

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by gnome »

Wanna buy some wood?

Image

I can gripe about W all day, but this moment in the 2004 debates was a masterpiece of comedic timing.
"If fighting is sure to result in victory, then you must fight! Sun Tzu said that, and I'd say he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it, and then he perfected it so that no living man could best him in the ring of honor. Then, he used his fight money to buy two of every animal on earth, and then he herded them onto a boat, and then he beat the crap out of every single one. And from that day forward any time a bunch of animals are together in one place it's called a zoo! (Beat) Unless it's a farm!"
--Soldier, TF2
User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 23535
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Rob Lister »

An Alabama man who said he tripped and broke his hip while buying a watermelon at a Walmart store has won a $7.5 million verdict in his lawsuit against the retailer. Henry Walker on Wednesday was awarded the damages after a jury trial in Phenix City, Alabama, just west of the Georgia state line, court records show. Walker had sued Arkansas-based Wal-Mart Stores Inc., saying his foot became trapped in a pallet beneath the watermelons as he reached for one of the fruits at a Phenix City Walmart on June 25, 2015. Al.com reports that when the then-59-year-old turned back toward his shopping cart, he fell. One of his lawyers says that Walker's days of playing basketball three times a week ended with the injury, which now requires him to use a walker.
http://www.newser.com/story/251409/he-f ... icher.html

I too have had my foot caught in a pallet. Pallets are hazardous like that. I think there is a shared responsibility here. Poor man broke his hip and will have to use a walker until the case is utterly settled, wherein he can toss it out. 7.5 million is a little much. I award him $100K and he can keep the watermelon.
User avatar
asthmatic camel
Posts: 19959
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 1:53 pm
Title: Forum commie nun.
Location: Stirring the porridge with my spurtle.

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by asthmatic camel »

Judge camel says:

"You, sir, are a dumbass. If you are incapable of carrying out such a simple task as buying a watermelon without seriously injuring yourself, then I recommend that you stay at home and send somebody else who is. Either that or book yourself a room at the Hotel California. Case dismissed, costs awarded to the defendant."
Shit happens. The older you get, the more often shit happens. So you have to try not to give a shit even when you do. Because, if you give too many shits, you've created your own shit creek and there's no way out other than swimming through the shit. Oh, and fuck.
User avatar
gnome
Posts: 25900
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:40 am
Location: New Port Richey, FL

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by gnome »

7.5m seems scaled not to the plaintiff's need or portion of responsibility, but as punitive damages. This usually means at some point the defendant pulled an ill-advised dick move and the jury got angry when they were informed of it.

It's not 100% reliable as a maxim, but I'd be willing to bet a small amount on it this time.

This is why (I would think) that large businesses usually make a settlement with plaintiffs injured on the premises even if they were not necessarily in the wrong, and carry liability insurance for such occasions. Something broke that script this time.
"If fighting is sure to result in victory, then you must fight! Sun Tzu said that, and I'd say he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it, and then he perfected it so that no living man could best him in the ring of honor. Then, he used his fight money to buy two of every animal on earth, and then he herded them onto a boat, and then he beat the crap out of every single one. And from that day forward any time a bunch of animals are together in one place it's called a zoo! (Beat) Unless it's a farm!"
--Soldier, TF2
User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 23535
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Rob Lister »

gnome wrote:7.5m seems scaled not to the plaintiff's need or portion of responsibility, but as punitive damages. This usually means at some point the defendant pulled an ill-advised dick move and the jury got angry when they were informed of it.

It's not 100% reliable as a maxim, but I'd be willing to bet a small amount on it this time.

This is why (I would think) that large businesses usually make a settlement with plaintiffs injured on the premises even if they were not necessarily in the wrong, and carry liability insurance for such occasions. Something broke that script this time.
Meh. Fuck you gnome. He gets $100K. That's it. Fuck the jury. Their biased because their all foot-hangers.

On a serious note: it is easy to get ones foot caught in a pallet. That's why the 100K. This an't their first foot-hanger. They've been warned before. THAT's why the 7.5 mil. Still ... 100K. Not a penny more.

P.S. I am channeling CH.
User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 29436
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Anaxagoras »

We now have a resolution to that lumber lawsuit I mentioned earlier:

Lumber lawsuit against Menards dismissed; judge says retailer didn't lie about its 4x4s
A federal judge has slammed the door on the Illinois lumber shoppers who sued Menards claiming it deceived them about the size of its 4x4s.

Saying no reasonable consumer would regard Menards’ descriptions of its lumber the way plaintiffs Michael Fuchs and Vladislav Krasilnikov said they did, the judge last week dismissed the would-be class action lawsuit against the Wisconsin-based home-improvement chain.

The decision by U.S. District Judge Edmond Chang throws out a case in which Menards was accused of deception because it marketed and labeled its 4x4s without specifying that the boards measure 3½ by 3 ½ inches.

So-called dimensional lumber — 2x4s, 4x4s, 2x6s and such — is commonly sold by names that do not specify the measurements of the pieces. The longstanding industry convention is recognized by the U.S. Department of Commerce, which distinguishes between the “nominal” designations for pieces of lumber and their actual size. The department says a 2x4, for example, can measure 1½ inches thick by 3½ inches wide.

The distinction between the name and the actual dimensions stems from the fact that lumber, when it is produced, typically is trimmed to smooth it after the initial rough cut, Chang said in his decision.

The government endorsement of the industry practice supports Menards’ argument that it didn’t falsely market its lumber, Chang said.

Further, he said, the labels on the lumber “are literally true,” because they do not show inch-mark symbols after the customary trade names of the lumber.

“Without a literally untrue statement, combined with the government-recognized distinction between nominal sizes and actual sizes, no reasonable consumer would think that the labels showed the exact dimensions of the lumber,” Chang said.

Beyond that, the judge said, Fuchs and Krasilnikov — who alleged they discovered they had been deceived when they got home and measured their lumber — easily could have used their tape measures in the store.

“It would be one thing if packaging prevented access to the height and width. … It is another thing where the plaintiffs can readily see if there is a mismatch between what they perceive as the size on the label and the height and width of the lumber,” Chang said.

In a brief statement, Menards applauded the decision by Chang, who sits in the northern district of Illinois.

“We feel that it was a frivolous lawsuit at best and we’re glad that common sense prevailed,” Menards spokesman Jeff Abbott said by email.

An attorney with McGuire Law, the Chicago-based class action firm that represented Fuchs and Krasilnikov, did not respond to a request for comment.

McGuire Law also represents the plaintiff in a similar lawsuit against Home Depot. That case is pending.
Home Depot lawsuit still pending but I don't see why the result should be any different.

I think the defendants should be awarded attorney costs too.
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare (probably Socrates originally)
User avatar
Doctor X
Posts: 74281
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Location: Your Mom

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Doctor X »

They have no comment since they lost their profit.

Remind me to bring a tape measure when buying lumber.

--J.D.
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out." – Don
DocX: FTW. – sparks
"Doctor X wins again." – Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry." – His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone." – clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far." – Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig." – Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power." – asthmatic camel
"just like Doc X said." – gnome

ImageWS CHAMPIONS X4!!!! ImageNBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup!Image SB CHAMPIONS X6!!!!!! Image
User avatar
sparks
Posts: 17261
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Friar McWallclocks Bar -- Where time stands still while you lean over!

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by sparks »

2 by 4s haven't been 2 by 4s for a long time... So much so, that when you do come across them, it's usually a big fucking problem. And how 'bout those new-fangled metal studs?

"I smell a big fat commie rat Mr. President!"
You can lead them to knowledge, but you can't make them think.
User avatar
Doctor X
Posts: 74281
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Location: Your Mom

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Doctor X »

THANKS OBAMA!

--J.D.
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out." – Don
DocX: FTW. – sparks
"Doctor X wins again." – Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry." – His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone." – clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far." – Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig." – Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power." – asthmatic camel
"just like Doc X said." – gnome

ImageWS CHAMPIONS X4!!!! ImageNBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup!Image SB CHAMPIONS X6!!!!!! Image
User avatar
ed
Posts: 41050
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: G_D

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by ed »

I thought that the measurement was becasue they were measured green and that after drying they shrank.

Perhaps our resident expert on shrinkage, Mr. Lister, would care to put in his 6" (2.5 actual)?
This space for let
User avatar
shemp
Posts: 7213
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 12:16 pm
Title: inbred shit-for-brains
Location: Planet X

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by shemp »

This means my house should be 25% bigger! I'm suing!
"It is not I who is mad! It is I who is crazy!" -- Ren Hoek

"what dicking deep shit i produce" -- pillory

Freedom of choice
Is what you got
Freedom from choice
Is what you want

People are shitting themselves to death
Crap so much they fail to take a breath
But even when their kids are starvin'
They thought Trump would throw them Charmin.
User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 23535
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Rob Lister »

A federal judge in Chicago has tossed a class-action lawsuit that argued McDonald's was duping consumers because a single "Extra Value Meal" costs more than the sum total of the individual components of the meal bought separately. The Chicago Daily Law Bulletin reported Monday that Kelly Killeen said she bought a sausage burrito breakfast Extra Value Meal in Chicago for $5.08. But she said the "value" label was deceptive because buying the same two sausage burritos, hash browns, and coffee individually would have cost a total of $4.97. Judge Elaine Bucklo noted that prices for combo meals and individual items are easily visible from the counter, the AP reports. She said just because some consumers don't want to bother to compare prices doesn't mean they can claim they've been fooled.
I don't know if this actually falls under stupid but it's pretty stupid.
User avatar
Grammatron
Posts: 36378
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 1:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Grammatron »

Kelly Killeen also testified that the individual prices were legible and visible.
User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 23535
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Rob Lister »

So it's a better value for McDonald
User avatar
gnome
Posts: 25900
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:40 am
Location: New Port Richey, FL

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by gnome »

I mean, fuck McDonalds for being sneaky, but I don't see it as actionable. I'd get my money back by getting customer service and saying I'm dissatisfied with the experience. That would probably do more to change it anyway. Isn't McDonalds one that will send you coupons or something if you complain?
"If fighting is sure to result in victory, then you must fight! Sun Tzu said that, and I'd say he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it, and then he perfected it so that no living man could best him in the ring of honor. Then, he used his fight money to buy two of every animal on earth, and then he herded them onto a boat, and then he beat the crap out of every single one. And from that day forward any time a bunch of animals are together in one place it's called a zoo! (Beat) Unless it's a farm!"
--Soldier, TF2
User avatar
sparks
Posts: 17261
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Friar McWallclocks Bar -- Where time stands still while you lean over!

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by sparks »

Simple: Don't go there anymore.

Hell, we all know clowns are evil, right?
You can lead them to knowledge, but you can't make them think.
User avatar
Grammatron
Posts: 36378
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 1:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Grammatron »

sparks wrote:Simple: Don't go there anymore.

Hell, we all know clowns are evil, right?
They got rid of the clown
User avatar
sparks
Posts: 17261
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Friar McWallclocks Bar -- Where time stands still while you lean over!

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by sparks »

Really? How do you know this? I mean really, for sure. :)

He's still there, pulling strings. You know he is.
You can lead them to knowledge, but you can't make them think.
User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 29436
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Anaxagoras »

He is still the official McDonald's mascot, but I don't think they feature him so much in their advertising anymore.

Clowns have a bit of an image problem these days.

Image
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare (probably Socrates originally)
User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 23535
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed

Re: Stupid Law Suits

Post by Rob Lister »

The suit alleges that Apple lied about the screen sizes by counting non-screen areas like the notch and corners. So the new line of iPhones aren't "all screen" as marketed, according to the 55-page complaint. For example, iPhone X's screen size is supposed to be 5.8 inches, but the plaintiffs measured that it's "only about 5.6875 inches."
https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-lied-ab ... t-alleges/

They also complain that the pixels are "fake" pixels because they don't use your granddad's RGB. No OLED screen uses RGB, they use pentile instead. RB-GB is the new 'pixel'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PenTile_matrix_family

Here's the actual complaint. It's a hoot. It is without merit since there's a footnote in the advertisements which addresses this minutiae difference.

It is without merit since there's a footnote in the advertisements which addresses this minutiae difference.
The display has rounded corners that follow a beautiful curved design, and these corners are within a standard rectangle. When measured as a standard rectangular shape, the screen is 5.85 inches (iPhone XS), 6.46 inches (iPhone XS Max), 6.06 inches (iPhone XR), or 5.85 inches (iPhone X) diagonally. Actual viewable area is less.
https://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/
I think the real reason for the lawsuit can be found on page 10. The exhibit shows the plaintiff's iphone.
:)