In this case, do you think she should be allowed to sue, and what amount should she receive if you think she should be allowed to sue?
"Oct. 3, 2007
NEW YORK (AP) - A Long Beach, Long Island woman got the bad news that she had breast cancer. She underwent a double mastectomy and then was told the lab made a mistake and she didn't have cancer.
Eason is a 35-year-old single mother who is now suing.
Her attorney says Eason was the victim of a mix-up at the the CBLPath medical lab in Rye Brook. Eason has filed a lawsuit against CBLPath in State Supreme Court in Mineola last month seeking an undisclosed sum of money."
2007-10-03 13:23:38 · 12 answers · asked by cantcu 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Why can't she just be happy that she doesn't have breast cancer and ask the lab to document how they have put in safe-guards so this type of thing doesn't happen again? If you think she should be allowed to sue then I hope you realize that the next time you get a lab test that your price included her lawsuit settlement.
2007-10-03 13:46:05 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Nobody in their right mind thinks that she should not be able to sue. Many do think that she should not be entitled to the untold millions that she is likely suing for. This is a terrible and unfortunate mistake, but how much are boobies really worth?
I bet she is seeking 8 figures...meaning at least $5 million per boob. That, to me, is excessive.
However, the ones which really make people mad are cases like the stupid woman who puts a full cup of coffee between her legs and puts cream and sugar in it IN A MOVING CAR, and sues for $6 million...now the award has been reduced to an undisclosed amount, but that woman PULLED OFF THE LID BETWEEN HER LEGS IN A MOVING CAR!!! As Bill Engvall says "If she had been wearing her sign, they could have stopped her."
ex...I want you to listen carefully. My brother is a raving liberal. He was excited to be involved in the full recount which took place after Gore's ILLEGAL lawsuits were called to a halt. My brother was very sad to report to me that no matter the scenario, Bush would have still won. That being said...if you want further proof, look at the media. Some papers showed it way back in the paper just as I stated it. IF there were ANY circumstance where Gore would have won, the liberal papers would have printed it as fact on the front page of every paper in the country. GET OVER THE BS! BUSH WON THE ELECTION!!! DAM N!
2007-10-03 13:32:08 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I would hope anyone undertaking such a severe operation would get a second opinion. Having said that she should be able to sue. The sky should not be the limit. (You could put the place out of business and then others that need the diagnoses may actually die from unnecessary delays.)
And you want the liberals to govenmentize health care. Do you think you will be able to sue then. Get real, read about the Canadians who received tainted blood. They got a few thousands of dollars and now have hep C it took them a dozen years I am sure lawyer fees ate most of it up.
By suing I believe they are against receiving 76 million dollars for spilling hot coffee on yourself. It has gotten out of control.
2007-10-05 15:12:05 · answer #3 · answered by Rick D 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Gary F "It in basic terms demands use of a 0.33-occasion outlet (e.g. that the remark be in a newspaper article, etc.); that the remark be directed at a particular guy or woman; and that the possibility exists that the remark would have a unfavorable result on the persons' occupation" in terms of public figures it is easily slightly harder than that - you could desire to coach truthfully malice, and that's no certainty. Michael Mann could easily in fantastic condition the definition of a public discern; i do no longer understand approximately Andrew Weaver. I believe the the remainder of your placed up, nonetheless. --------- good questions. All those in contact interior the 'climategate' emails at the instant are involuntary public figures, alongside with Briffa and Mann. i could argue that Mann replaced right into a constrained public discern previous to this because of 'hockey stick controversy', and any rates of defamation surrounding themes concerning the hockey stick could require that truthfully malice be time-honored. nonetheless, defamation generally is hard to examine, and pondering the region of lots of those statements (i.e. blogs and message boards), much greater so. you ought to probable locate some revealed statements by ability of the likes of Monckton or different extensive-unfold individuals of the denialist incorrect information device that must be greater fruitful. i'm no criminal expert, yet that's how i could study it.
2016-12-17 16:28:40 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Heres my take for what its worth. I think she has a tort. I also think several things are left out. Usually they also sue all the doctors and all the nurses and hospitals. Basically anyone however remotely attached to the case gets named in the lawsuit. Thats my beef with the current system. Personally I think its a slam dunk and she should be compensated.
2007-10-03 13:29:34 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No one would begrudge this poor woman compensation but are megabucks going to bring back her breasts? We live in a country that makes money the be-all, end-all and if the previous answerer is correct and she receives $10 million for this, I envision her quitting her job, sinking into the depths of despair and dying of alcoholism. I'm more inclined to side with St.Francis who cherished Lady Poverty, took her as his spouse and was constantly grateful for her gifts. Lawsuits are tickets to hell for the vast majority of the people who see them as their justice. I prefer mercy to justice. We don't live in a perfect world, nobody is perfect, bad things happen and people make mistakes. I wish we as Americans could just grow up and accept fundamental realities.
2007-10-04 19:59:41 · answer #6 · answered by Babs 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sounds reasonable.
Sue McDonalds because coffee is actually hot or Smith & Wesson because some criminal steals and uses a gun...those people and their lawyers should be thrown in jail.
BTW Bush Stopped Gore from breaking the law, he was elected legally. Anyone who says he was selected is a liar and should be sued ;-)
2007-10-03 14:04:56 · answer #7 · answered by RockHunter 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Why is it that in this case nobody says that is what happen when you have privatized health care?
Anyway I sure don't see anything frivolous here but I think is amazing that it took not only after the operation that they noticed. A lot of details left.
2007-10-03 13:38:34 · answer #8 · answered by Jose R 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No woman should ever have that---I don't know what to call it---happen to her. No one should defend themselves after what they did to her. This is the modern world and it will happen that insurance creeps will say it's OK cuz they have more money. This poor woman can only settle.
2007-10-03 13:34:58 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
She should sue for alot of money, its frivolous law suits that are outrageous.
2007-10-03 13:31:05 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋