rowyn: (downcast)
[personal profile] rowyn
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~53~2691638,00.html

What's especially sad about this story is that, on some occasions when I've been on a cookie-baking spree, I've thought of making cookies for my neighbors. I've never met most of them.

But I've never done it, because I figured in an age where parents throw out trick-or-treat lollipops because they might've been unwrapped and re-wrapped, my cookies would be as likely to be thrown away as enjoyed.

*sigh*

Date: 2005-02-05 06:40 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jordangreywolf.livejournal.com
Dratted frivolous lawsuits. @@@@ >=( (Groan.)

Well, I like your cookies! =D

Date: 2005-02-05 07:39 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] level-head.livejournal.com
Seconded on both counts.

===|==============/ Level Head

Date: 2005-02-05 06:52 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] the-vulture.livejournal.com
I read through the message board at the site. I didn't post there as it is pretty freaking early in the morning and I'm too tired to go through the whole mess of signing up, but I think perhaps that people are being too harsh on the judge involved in the case.

I'm going to play a little bit of a devil's advocate here; if you incurred medical expenses, that you would have difficulties paying, from some unasked for action, whatever the motivation, would you want to be stuck with the bill? Now, granted, if I were Wanita, I would have accepted the offer of assistance with the medical bill and left it at that. But the fact remains that the girls caused her injury, whether they intended to or not. That's the way things work; if you cause damage, you're expected to repair it. And that's why the judge ruled as he did. And, before everyone jumps over Wanita, I suggest that perhaps people think first about her background. Perhaps she has valid reasons to be as paranoid as she is (not everyone comes from a pleasant neighbourhood, afterall). Knowing very well how much of a terror teenagers can be, I can easily see a situation where a person, constantly plagued by a group of them, could readily see the worst in all of them.

As for taking it to court, pursuing damages for emotional damage and what not is beyond what I would accept, but ensuring that the matter is taken to court is explainable; how many people have agreed to settle the matter out of court only to have to drag the matter up again when the other side fails to meet their obligations?

Now, maybe Wanita is a mean hearted bitch. But let's consider other possibilities before just assuming that she is (remember, if you assume, you just make as 'ass' out of 'u' and 'me').

Date: 2005-02-05 07:38 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] level-head.livejournal.com
Hmmm. I understand the thrust of your point, but reach a different conclusion.

The cookie drop was a cause precedent to the woman's anxiety, but it was her rather strange reaction to the situation.

Note that the anxiety attack occurred AFTER the "victim" learned that it was just a tin of cookies and a nice note. She was not merely attempting to recover costs of her attack -- she was teaching these two girls "a lesson", as she put it.

Remember also that there were two other people in her house that evening. And that there was no indication that she had EVER been burglarized -- but HAS "tangled with" neigbors previously.

Reviewing your last paragraph, I am of the tentative belief based upon the evidence so far that the "other possibilities" are much less likely.

===|==============/ Level Head

Date: 2005-02-05 06:47 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kelloggs2066.livejournal.com
"Don't be too proud of this Legalistic Terror you've constructed. The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next the power of the cookies." -- Darth Cookie Monster

Date: 2005-02-05 10:33 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kirzen.livejournal.com
There's a problem with your logic Mikey, inherrent to the US civil courts and legal system with a whole, the standard of the reasonable person. There is the idea that you shouldn't ever be raked over the coals for something that you've done 'just' because someone is caused some sort of damage by it, if their reaction is unreasonable. Steadilly we have let this fall to the point where you're pretty much liable for anything regardless of how positively moronic one would have to be to recieve 'damages'.

Someone while -trying to break INTO your home-, slips on your dew-wet grass or falls through your skylight because they don't see it ATOP your roof in the middle of the night, and you're responsible.
Polish the glass too thuroughly at your front doors and don't make them shatterproof? Someone breaks one and gets cut, and they'll sue you.
Someone comes looking for your dog with a stick, poking at it through the bars on your fence, getting it angry until it hops the fence and mauls them, guess what... you're liable because your fence isn't high enough to keep in a normally docile pet that's been thuroughly frightened and aggravated.

Cases like these are won all the time in the US, sometimes for some serious cash settlements. The glass door? Happened in Canada about 8 years ago (took it in law class) The skylight? Happened in australia, about a decade ago... The dog one I know has almost certainly happened but haven't seen it with my own eyes, so *shrug*.

By the way, the assume quote, is the -WORST- most worthless piece of tripe I've ever heard anyone regurgitate, the fact is that evolution itself is based on learned responses, when people are assuming things, they're not just throwing darts blindly into a crowd of people, they're (if they're a decent person) trying to rationalize something from what they've heard or seen, (Whether or not they have enough evidence for their determination is another arguement, but its very much open to point of view, I might have enough to go 'bitch' where someone else might think otherwise 'regardless' of how much 'evidence' is offered up). {Sorry to slash and burn that quote, but I absolutely -detest- it Mikey *hugs*}

So, I postulate : Ms Young is a bitch, frightened by something and feeling spiteful after finding the cookies on her doorstep, she lets herself get riled up and goes into the doctor (I'm sorry, if I wanted, I "could" -fake- a panic attack for legal damages, and I can't see her being suddenly 'scared for her life' at the idea of having cookies left for her). Feeling spiteful, on top of the fact that she doesn't get along well with her neighbours and hates the neighbourhood, she decides she's going to 'Go for the throat' whether to see what she can get out of it in damages, or whether she wants to just be mean spirited and cause a pair of girls with very good intentions, some sort of harm in return. The fact is that to those girls $800 in 'damages' is far more than they ever intended to do to her, and she should recognize that and drop the issue entirely

/Rant 'Off'

Date: 2005-02-05 04:44 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] the-vulture.livejournal.com
Ya know me; always seeing multiple sides of an issue...

Date: 2005-02-05 03:52 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] koogrr.livejournal.com
THEY WERE IMMENSELY ENJOYED!

It was one of my best surprise Christmas gifts! I'm so behind on everything I've forgotten to properly thank you. They sustained me for a month, I'd have one every day for breakfast! They were awesome, intriguingly crumbly, and very sweet.

The birthday books were neat too. Need to scan... need to scan...

COOKIEEEEE!

Date: 2005-02-05 07:04 pm (UTC)

May 2025

S M T W T F S
    12 3
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 1st, 2025 11:00 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios