Why is suing over stupid things bad?

Question

Example... You go to mcdonalds and slip on a piece of ice so you sue mcdonalds for pain and suffering adn a broken hip. Thank you

Answer 1

It creates a vicious cycle by doing this: You sue, McDonalds has their insurance pay you for the damages, McDonalds insurance premiums (cost of insurance) goes up, forcing them to charge more for their items, the insurance company ups their rate for everyone in an attempt to get back all the money they lost in the case against McDonalds. Basically, EVERYONE ends up paying in the end. What is the worst is when people sue doctors for every little thing, when it's NOT a case of malpractice or negligence. The doctors insurance premiums are SO high now that many can't even afford to be practicing doctors anymore. THey (the doctors) who do stay in business, need to charge higher fees in order to pay for their insurance, thus making good medical care unaffordable to many people. So basically. when you sue over what is simply an accident, everyone pays for it.

Answer 2

The example you just described isn't a stupid example. If McDonalds are negligent enough to allow a customer to slip on spilled liquid, thus ruining a a good 6 months of the persons life, maybe even lose his job, then McDonalds should be required to pay compensation.

A stupid thing to sue for would be if you ordered a Big Mac and sued McDonalds because they forgot the cheese.

Answer 3

Prisoners have plenty time on their hands, they think of up a lot of super court circumstances. Robert Lee Brock desperate to sue the guy he blamed all his problems on. He sued him for $5 million money. He sued... himself. He claimed that the defendant (him) violated the plaintiff's (his) civil rights while the defendant allowed the plaintiff to get drink. The alcohol instigated the offender habit. Now right here is the place the authentic genius shines: He argued that because of the fact the defendant (himself) did not have any money, the STATE could pay. i'm uncertain if this grow to be a tactic to make money or a tactic to be transferred from the reformatory right into a psychological employer.

Answer 4

Well, sure, there are many cases: The cup of coffee that was "too hot," the slippery floor, the excessive use of unnecessary Trans-Fats in food products that cause heart problems, a large fast-food company's use of tainted produce that causes outbreaks of E-Coli, ect.

But what other recourse would the average working people have if they couldn't file legal actions against large companies. Certainly the large companies don't want to take responsibility for their improper actions! So, without a legal system that gives the people, the average working woman and man the chance to challenge these companies' actions, whether justifiable or not, what would happen to the rights of working people?

Answer 5

Let's say I was "allergic" to girls with pink things in their hair, and I came across your question, so I decided to sue you for not placing a warning that you had a pink thing in your hair. You (and I) would have to waste time going to court to argue how stupid my 'case' was. Most likely you would win the suit, but it would still eat up hours of your time that you would never get back.

If you slip on a piece of ice at McDonald's, it's your own dumb fault for not looking where you are going! If you drop a piece of ice on your own kitchen floor, and ten minutes later you step on it and fall, are you going to sue yourself?

Answer 6

Because it costs the company un-necessary money and in turn, raises the prices for everyone else.

Answer 7

thats not a stupid thing to sue sumone for! you broke your hip!