Pain And Suffering?

Question

I've noticed on a lot of court shows (Judge Mathis, Judy,etc.), that many people sue for pain and suffering. Sometimes it's the Defendant, adding it in addition to their original purpose of suing, and then, in some cases, the Plaintiff countersues. While i'm not trying to judge these people, sometimes I think it's a bit ridiculous to sue for pain and suffering for something like a cell phone bill. In your opinion, do you think they do this mainly for more money, because their original point of suing won't get them much? Also, outside of the Judge Judy or Judge Mathis show, how well would the claim of pain and suffering hold up in the courtroom?

Answer 1

I agree that it's ridiculous for someone to sue for pain and suffering over a cell phone bill, but pain and suffering is a BIG player when you're talking about cases of medical malpractice where a loved one dies, or a wrongful death suit where a drunk driver drives his SUV right through a red light and literally splits a car in half, killing a mother and her two sons (we have a case like that in Oakland County right now). Bear in mind also that in some cases people claim pain and suffering when they really should be claiming something else, like loss of use or time and effort that has to be expended to clear something up -- like, say, a cell phone bill.

Answer 2

Just to let you know it's the Plaintiff that sues and so the Defendant would countersue. From an english and irish law perspective pain and suffering can be a major factor and as has been pointed out in cases where there is great emotional pain involved such as in car accidents the amount awarded can be substantially made up of compensation for pain and suffering. It really does depend on the circumstances of the case and the individual bringing the case. I'm not familiar with legislation in the US but I assume the same principles would apply.

Answer 3

Pain and Suffering was originally for people who suffered consequences which would leave them in physical pain, physical suffering, monetary suffering.... I'm sure there is some sort of in-depth equation to figure it out on a case to case basis but people are basically lazy and ignorant and want free milk all the time so if you took my cell phone from me and i reported it stolen and then we ended up in civil court because you called germany i would sue you for the charges and the time you had my phone and the price of my phone and then my pain and suffering is what??? Sleepless nights cuz i didn't know what you were doing with my phone... that's gotta be worth at least a hundred bucks... and then the extra suffering from calling and reporting my phone stolen.... there's another hundred bucks.... then the price of the phone itself.... and the suffering I had to go through trying to locate all the numbers I had to put in my new phone... and the price of the new phone... and the time spent texting everyone telling them i have a new phone number.... we're looking at thousands of dollars here..... anyway it should be we can sue for "Ignorance and Frustration" not pain and suffering....

Answer 4

Pain and suffering are common, but only in situations where they actually occur. Not contractual cases, and not situtations where there is only property damage.

Pain and suffering is generally only available in personal injury cases, such as negligence, medical malpractice, products liability, and so on. It refers to more than just annoyance and inconvenience, but the actual pain suffered because of the physical injury.

Answer 5

I don't believe it would hold up in a court of law. TV shows are normally for intertainment.

Answer 6

i C!
A!