According to this story, a lawyer is suing his dry-cleaner for $65 million because they lost his pants. The original cost is only $10.50. The lawyer says he "deserves millions for the damages he suffered by not getting his pants back, for his litigation costs, for mental suffering, inconvenience and discomfort".
Funny Statistics. Funny Numbers. Don't go to cocktail parties without them.
About Me
- Numeric Life
- I am a medical school librarian. I love collecting statistics from social and science studies. Numbers simply make me feel better.
Category
- About this blog (6)
- Animal (1)
- Business (9)
- Education (3)
- Enviroment (2)
- Funny Statistics (31)
- Funny Videos (4)
- Genetics (1)
- Health (31)
- Human Nature (81)
- Intelligence (2)
- Kids (7)
- Marketing (2)
- Marriage (7)
- Math (2)
- Money (10)
- Music (1)
- Parent (1)
- Placebo Effect (1)
- Politics (7)
- Poll (1)
- Psychology (1)
- School (1)
- science (6)
- Sex (3)
- Sport (1)
- Statistics (27)
- Survey (4)
- Technology (1)
- Video (1)
- Women (5)
- Women vs. Men (14)
- Work (24)
- World Record (7)
Amazon Kindle
Blog Archive
Powered by Blogger. DownRight Blogger Theme v3.0 created by (© 2007) Thur Broeders
7 comments:
Gosh... will you hate me if I say I want to be a lawyer ?!
I wrote about this in my blog today as well. If any story ever reinforced every possible negative stereotype about lawyers, it's this one. Someone needs a judge to tell him to quit wasting the people's time.
It's people like Pearson that abuse their powers and make the general category of "lawyers" despictable! This is so ridiculous, it's a waste of time, money, efforts...what kind of lame person is he? he was a lawyer, and now a judge, yet he couldn't even afford a suit - WTF is wrong with that????!!! How can he sleep at night and think that his demands are reasonable and justified? The cleaners offered him more than reasonable settlement ...I mean $12000 for a pair of pants, that's probably only worth $20??? who's the greedy SOB?
Yup. That would explain in!
Mental suffering?
Huh?
Isn't he wasting his time by suing them instead of doing something else?
Yep, this is why.
While I do agree that this is beyond the realm of ridiculousness, I find it interesting that no one is questioning the consumer protection law under which this was brought. The numbers do seem to add up (though it should NEVER have gotten this far).
Post a Comment