(no subject)

[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*

Comments

[jordangreywolf.livejournal.com]

Dratted frivolous lawsuits. @@@@ >=( (Groan.)

Well, I like your cookies! =D

[level-head.livejournal.com]

Seconded on both counts.

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

[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').

[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

And today's lesson is:

[rowyn]

Don't be nice to strangers.

*sigh*

[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

The power of cookies!

[rowyn]

:) This seems very appropriate, somehow.

Re: The power of cookies!

[kelloggs2066.livejournal.com]

Have you seen the followup?

http://www.9news.com/acm_news.aspx?OSGNAME=KUSA&IKOBJECTID=e3cf0639-0abe-421a-00d2-832b5478fd7b&TEMPLATEID=0c76dce6-ac1f-02d8-0047-c589c01ca7bf

[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'

[the-vulture.livejournal.com]

Ya know me; always seeing multiple sides of an issue...

We all have our faults

[rowyn]

But that doesn't mean we all have this one.

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?

Yes. Or, more precisely, I would determine the motivation first, and if I judged there to be no malice, I would prefer to pay my own bill.

In case you don't believe me:

When I was in college, I went into a grovery store several yards ahead of a couple of friends. Then I went back to the door, stood right up next to it as I waited for them, and scratched at it like a cat. I was goofing off.

The store had one of those rubber mats in front of the door, that used to be pressure-activated and would open when stepped on. But, it turned out, the mats were no longer connected to the doors -- they were opened by motion sensors. A few yards before my friends reached the mat it opened, catching me by surprise, tearing my sneaker, and bending back my big toenail. The toenail didn't break and was at such an angle that it couldn't be clipped, either. I wound up in an emergency room for two hours waiting for someone to bring a scalpel and cut it off. (I was tempted to do it myself, if anyone had offered me a scalpel.)

Before I went to the emergency room, the employees at the store had rushed out to attend to me, and within a few minutes, it was obvious they were worried that I'd sue.

Could I have sued? Certainly. Would I have been successful? Possibly. The doors could've been engineered to prevent them from opening if someone was in the way, for example. There were reasonable measures the store could have taken to prevent te injury I received.

But it was my actions that were out of line. I behaved in an unpredictable and improbable way which resulted in someone else's non-malicious actions causing me injury. I had no interest in bringing them to court, or even asking them for money, based on my doing something pretty silly.

For that matter, I didn't even sue the people who sold me a house without disclosing a serious flooding problem that they almost certainly knew about. Why would I sue a couple of schoolkids for unintentionally scaring me?

If you'll notice in my original post, I did not take sides or insist that Ms. Young was the villain of the piece. But I do think it's pretty sad when a couple of kids can be fined for delivering a pleasant surprise.

[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...

Yay!

[rowyn]

I'm glad you got them! And enjoyed them. I like to hear that the things I've made, in particular, are enjoyed. Which is the real reason I've never risked giving cookies to my neighbors. :)

COOKIEEEEE!

[kelloggs2066.livejournal.com]