The Most Frivolous Lawsuits Ever
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 июн 2024
- ⚖️ Do you need a great lawyer? I can help! legaleagle.link/eagleteam ⚖️
Some lawsuits have merit. These ones...don't.
📚 Get a free trial of Skillshare Premium: legaleagle.link/skillshare
🚀 Watch my next video early & ad-free on Nebula! legaleagle.link/watchnebula
👔 Suits by Indochino! legaleagle.link/indochino
GOT A VIDEO IDEA? TELL ME!
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Send me an email: devin@legaleagle.show
MY COURSES
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Interested in LAW SCHOOL? Get my guide to law school! legaleagle.link/lawguide
Need help with COPYRIGHT? I built a course just for you! legaleagle.link/copyrightcourse
SOCIAL MEDIA & DISCUSSIONS
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Twitter: legaleagle.link/twitter
Facebook: legaleagle.link/facebook
Tik Tok: legaleagle.link/tiktok
Instagram: legaleagle.link/instagram
Reddit: legaleagle.link/reddit
Podcast: legaleagle.link/podcast
OnlyFans legaleagle.link/onlyfans
Patreon legaleagle.link/patreon
BUSINESS INQUIRIES
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Please email my agent & manager at legaleagle@standard.tv
LEGAL-ISH DISCLAIMER
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Sorry, occupational hazard: This is not legal advice, nor can I give you legal advice. I AM NOT YOUR LAWYER. Sorry! Everything here is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Nothing here should be construed to form an attorney-client relationship. Also, some of the links in this post may be affiliate links, meaning, at no cost to you, I will earn a small commission if you click through and make a purchase. But if you click, it really helps me make more of these videos! All non-licensed clips used for fair use commentary, criticism, and educational purposes. See Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, 276 F.Supp.3d 34 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); Equals Three, LLC v. Jukin Media, Inc., 139 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (C.D. Cal. 2015).
Special thanks:
Stock video and imagery provided by Getty Images
Music provided by Epidemic Sound
Short links by pixelme.me (pxle.me/eagle)
For those of you looking for the McDonald's coffee cup case, that will be the subject of a future video (spoiler: perhaps it's NOT frivolous???)
📚 Get a free trial of Skillshare Premium: legaleagle.link/skillshare
It's far from frivolous...
hi
That cup of coffee burnt the SHIT out of her thighs. No way that was just a "little too hot"
@@MastaDJMax yea their coffee caused literal 3rd degree burns, definitely unreasonably hot
It's a shame that the smear campaign that McDonalds did over that case is all people can remember and refer back to. My goodness, that poor woman was dragged through the mud after all she already endured.
"Im suing myself for 20 million dollars, but becuase i cant pay it i want hte state to do it instead"
this guy is a mad genius
Yep! I f only it worked, your honor I'm a terrible person I'm suing myself for giving myself a terrible life for 500 mil, but because of my poor decisions for myself I do not have the wealth and request the gov pay on my behalf! lol!
I think they mean paid from the taxes of citizens
Lol
Communism
R/madlads
The guy who wanted to legally chop 20 years off his date of birth is still less crazy than the judge who demanded 67.3 million dollars from the cleaners.
I think the guy in India who sued his parents for giving birth to him without his consent takes the cake for frivolous lawsuits.
@@caferune6355 I think that was more to send a message than to actually get money from his parents. It's similar to the guy in this video who sued bud light.
I'm sure he would have had better luck with the sorts of people who can manufacture up fake ids and identities.
@@takatamiyagawa5688 probably not. He's a has-been celebrity whose name at least is well known around the country.
Something tells me the judge just wanted to cause trauma to the real victim.
I recently heard of a German court case decided in 2000, where a woman wanted to legally change her degree from "Doctor" to "Doctora". The court informed her that the proper Latin feminization of "Doctor" is "Doctrix", which she didn't want as her degree, saying it reminded her too much of Asterix and Obelix. In any case, the court held that it is neither the right nor the duty of the state to continue developing the Latin grammar.
Doctrix sounds awesome! Sounds like some Supervilain in the Marvel universe or something...
In Spanish it's Doctora, so if she wants that change made, she can always move to Spain.
Asterisk and Obelix is a fire cartoon idk what she was on
Dominatrix?
@@KnakuanaRkayep, similar root
Honestly the dad who was trying to push back on drinking advertisements appealing to kids has a point. When you think about the time and resources spent promoting alcohol it is kind of insane.
Isn't that whole idea why Joe Camel is no longer a thing for Camel cigarettes? I could imagine the Budweiser Frogs being slapped down for it too. Talking frogs appealing to kids. And no more alcohol or smoking commercials during kids' cartoons times as well.
It's a good and nobel cause but it went the wrong way about it
@Terahnee yeah all the old adverts that used to use anthropomorphic animals selling alcohol or tobacco (possibly other things that are adult or hazardous to one's health) got banned to avoid 'enticing children'. Which probably wasn't a bad thing, but as an adult now who grew up with spuds and the budwiser frogs, I am kinda bummed (I'm glad the Clydesdales still pop up occasionally, though that's an entirely different ethical mire)
@@bellablue5285 as a person who grew up around STL I love the Busch family because they own so much of the city, including having their horses kept right near the zoo that they have generously donated to
It's been a thing in Europe for decades. I was born in 1992 in Finland and have never seen tobacco or hard liquor commercials on TV. Beer commercials used to be allowed after 22:00 or something like that, but even that was removed some decade ago.
Now they've even gotten on the ridiculous end that even trucks transtporting alcohol and factories making it can't have labels of alcoholic drinks on them.
So now we have non alcoholic versions being advertised with similar labels, with 0,0% tagged on them somewhere 😂
I've felt like a 70 year old since I was 10. I would like to start collecting my pension now, please.
Depending on how old you are, I assume some back-pay will be in order!
Edit: or rather, how old you will be? No.. How old you will have had to have been having not been how old you are now that you have had your legitimate age correctly attributed and documented. Or else having had have hadn’t been corrected.
@@dpearson80808 what
This should be pinned 😭😭😭
@@dpearson80808 r/ihadastroke
I Identify as a 70 year old bi man
Now could we all file a class action lawsuit on mobile app developers who advertise games with completely different functionality than the actual games being advertised? I think we’re all emotionally distressed
Forreal, I already complained too much about it ;-;
You can
People have actually done so already
It won't matter though, they are in their rights to do it. I've seen a video somewhere explaining why, pretty sure it was on Game Theory
Most of those are chinese companies so pulling Them to court probably wont Work sadly
Suggesting a frivolous lawsuit on a video about frivolous lawsuits lmao
I hate the deception as much as the next guy but "emotionally distressed" is not the angle - It's false advertising, plain and simple
@@bretthake7713 but you need to demonstrate damages from the false advertisement which would be emotional distress since most of these apps are free
You might get sued for covering it, but there was a guy who filed a suit against the Guinness Book of World Records after hearing a rumor that they were going to name him the most litigious man in the world
Haha. No way. That's funny
😂😂😂
Not helping your case, dude.
How has he never been named a vexatious litigant and sanctioned?
The fact that the words “Alleged Missing Pants” had to seriously be said in court is just… truly beautiful
One woman sued 2 teen neighbor girls who knocked on her door and left cookies. She asked who was there, but they left wanting to surprise her with what they baked. She feared they were robbers. She had an anxiety attack and checked herself in to a hospital, thinking she was having a heart attack.
She called the police, claiming the girls damaged her door. They didn't find evidence of this. The girls apologized and offered to pay her medical expenses. The woman didn't think they were sincere and didn't like that they didn't apologize in person. She sued them for almost $900 and won. People who thought the situation was so ridiculous gave the teens the money to pay her off.
What a bish, id be happy if my neighbours left me cookies.
@@ruzahel6287 i mean...i'd have to have seeen them walking off the property then i'd be thrilled about the cookies
I mean, it's valid. I'm friendly, but I'll never appreciate somebody making such (even if good-hearted) pranks. Anxiety is bad and she could've sued for more.
@@mariafilip6731 so, should a UPS (or whatever delivery service) driver be sued if they actually ring the bell when they drop the package just because they didn't respond to being asked who they are. After all, it's the same situation, something is dropped off for the home owner and the person leaves immediately.
If you have that much worry about potential robbers, leave the door locked and call the police.
And yeah, I personally wouldn't eat random cookies left at my door if I didn't know who left them. But if you're that overly paranoid and panic over any knock at the door you should seek medical help for it.
@@mariafilip6731 It wasn't a prank. The girls said they thought they were doing an act of kindness, didn't know about her health condition, apologized, and offered to pay the women's medical expenses.Those were home-made cookies and they delivered them to the homes of other neighbors who didn't have a problem with the act.
That Judge Pearson suit is the stuff Karens' dreams are made of.
And it took well over a decade for them to do something about it. Law license suspended for 90 days? Why not more like 20 years?
@@robertthomas5906 Oh, absolutely. I would have thought a judge filing a lawsuit that stupid would be laughed out of town by his own colleagues once word got out.
I hope you're using karen appropriately
Down to the thinly veiled racism.
ALL these suits are pretty much Karen-related. XD
Former correctional officer here. I was actually sued by an inmate one time for "emotional distress" because i had brought in Hardee's for lunch once time and i wouldn't share it with him. The judge sensibly dismissed the case quoting, "I have better things to do with my time."
Other great inmate cases that came from our CI (many inmates literally have nothing to do but file lawsuits) were:
1. An inmate suing the institution for breach of security after he looked out his window and saw Santa dancing on the yard. In his filing, he openly admitted to taking meth beforehand.
2. Inmates trying to file a class action lawsuit against the state for allowing bland biscuits to be served at chow time.
3. An inmate trying to sue Salma Hayek for not dating him.
and many more...
I feel like that if inmates have nothing better to do than file lawsuits in their free time, there’s an issue. Of course, as a guard, you had nothing to do with that being the case.
@@gavinbrown216 My thoughts exactly, I would probably do similar. Everyone with their life essentially frozen has literally nothing better to do anyway. I'm sure the people in on drug charges who watch rapists come in and out on a third of their sentence go especially insane...
Wow, that’s just crazy
Pretty sure there’s more to #2. Like, idk, how we literally feed them food not meant for people???
Instead of bitching about how inconvenient inmates are to you and choosing the examples that make them look bad, how about wondering why they file lawsuits. Why they have sooo much time. And start being honest about real problems in prisons.
@@allisoncastle I wasn't bitching, but I can if you want me to. I can bitch about the problems in prisons. About how CO's are understaffed, overworked, and underpaid. I can bitch about not knowing who to trust because some of your coworkers have been bought out by inmates. I can bitch about having a ceiling cave in on me because the institution hasn't been maintained in thirty years. I can bitch about a coworker getting raped while trying to do her job and the inmates responsible getting the equivalent of a slap on the wrist. I can bitch about how inmates tried to KILL me TWICE, once because I confiscated a bag of homemade alcohol and once because I spurned his advances. But no, let's talk about what you think prison problems are.
And for the record, the food was bland, not inedible. This is encouraged by the kitchen shift leads (who are inmates, btw). The more tasteless the food, the smaller portions the inmates take, the longer the supplies last.
The guy who sued Busch honestly has a point. Since we banned those types of advertisements for cigarettes, they really should be for alcohol as well. So many people lie to themselves about what they're actually putting in their body, and it's real easy when you have a commercial every 10 minutes telling you it's ok.
The sense I get is that his motives were sensible, but his methods were totally absurd. The specific claims of the case were nonsense. But he had nothing else to go on, as what he was complaining about - that these ads cause societal harm - have no legal standing. If that could have legal standing, so many companies would be rightfully sued into bankruptcy.
The difference is alcohol is not an absolute health detriment. Smoking is. With the exception of one random case study that notices that smokers appear to be less likely to have colitis, smoking harms your health in every aspect. Furthermore, alcohol is not inherently addictive. The feeling and high can be addictive, but not in an absolute sense as nicotine does which has had decades of proven research.
It's important to make that distinction. Because ignorance is not a valid excuse to bar a product from marketing. The smoking industry actually does require strict regulation because they purposely advertise government bills as good when its lobbying for further cigarette sales. Besides, advertisements all have the health disclosures and it is also included in the product label itself. If you don't know about what you're putting into your body, its because you make no effort whatsoever to check the information yourself or don't care until you actually feel the effects. So no, no point made. If you feel lied to, its because common sense has alluded you. As the video says, it's well known. Also, why would you purposely make a bad advertisement? Sounds pretty stupid.
@@pluna3382 "Alcohol is not an absolute health detriment". Tell that to the anti saloon league...
The difference is that if you’ll notice, none of the ads ever talk about the taste or encourage you to drink. At the end, they always say “drink responsibly.” They’re also not allowed to use sports stars to promote alcohol (they only use retired athletes). And I’m pretty sure alcohol isn’t advertised at the times kids would be watching.
@@pluna3382Alcohol is an absolute health detriment though. The studies showing that alcohol in moderation is healthier than no alcohol at all where completely biased, and can elaborate if you want me to.
6:00
So thats how employers expect you to get 30 years of experience at age 22.
I can see it now: "Come on! You gotta believe! FEEL IT!!!" 🤣
They won’t even interview anyone with 30 years experience.
I'm a little surprised the dry cleaning couple didn't get a ruling to have their lawyer fees paid by the plaintiff considering how he couldn't even prove the pants were lost.
yea.
I think that's the worst part of the US legal system:
If a lawsuit can ruin you even if it is frivolous and you win, then there's something seriously wrong with the legal system...
I get the impression the US lawmakers either didn't think of or didn't care about the consequences of that system.
I'm really surprised that's not the case, I just assumed it was something so obvious every judiciary system in the world would do that.
@@Bird_Dog00 I'd suspect, in fact, that they consider it a feature, not a bug: an important part of the class system maintenance toolkit. Though likely a happy accident rather than deliberately put in, I think.
@@robertmiller9735 You may very well have a point there.
Kinda sad, but...
Part of the problem is that lawyers are not a government service and can ask for any amount of money they want. People are already terrified of going up against big corporations in legal battles, if they then would have to fit the bill for there triple digit an hour lawyers upon loss, nobody would even try. That being said I still would like to see a minimum compensation implemented, even though realistically this would never completely payoff all of the legal fees.
Why the hell isn't it standard for the plaintiff to have to pay the defendant's legal costs in the event their lawsuit is found to be frivolous?
I would like to propose a bill to get this changed. Not for ALL I don’t think but for many. Certainly for proved frivolous (perhaps we can look at other countries verbiage to see if that would help)
The Defendants can overprice their prospective legal costs by a huge factor, then the legal team can write down their bill to a realistic one after the plaintiffs drop their lawsuit.
Unfortunately, there is no good definition of “frivolous lawsuit” except, like Pr0n, you know it when you see it. The infamous MacDonald’s hot coffee served too hot lawsuit turns out to have had merit, as the cups were rated for much lower temperatures than at which the coffee was served.
@@Egilhelmson the hot coffee case even when looking at it face value doesn't look frivolous in the first place. It was the narrative of the big company that was negligent that framed it as a frivolous lawsuit in order to get the public on its side. The worst part is that it worked.
Because this is America and everything we do seems to be biased against the poor and middle class.
@@gloomyblackfur399Yes
I have an Uncle who is an EMT dispatcher in Georgia, a man tried to sue him for sending black paramedics to his heart attack call. And yes, there was a rebel flag hanging outside his door.
The guy claimed he was being discriminated against because of his age, but…. something tells me he wasn’t swiping right on 60 years old women either.
He said he was "denied dates". What an incel.
The guy is rather well known here in the Netherlands, and let's just say he's, uhm, eccentric...
Just sayin, gum job man.... don't knock it till ya try it.
@@rjfaber1991 I don't think I've ever heard one Dutch person say one positive thing about Ratelband. All I really knew him from was that whole "TSJAKKAAAA!!" thing
@@gaiusjuliuspleaser Are you telling me you didn't know he once bought a Ferrari, not to drive it but to put it inside his office for 'motivational' purposes?
"Unfair denial of tinder dates...." That's a new one for me. In other words, he wanted younger women and they weren't interested in him.
Yuck, talk about exaggerated sense of entitlement.
Smith52 All he had to do was become a rich celeb and tell everyone a false birth year. Or simply get filthy rich. Younger gold diggers would be all over him. Problem solved.
A very experienced mental health professional once told me that women in their fifties struggle to find men their age to date because the number of average older men that are after women in their thirties is very large. Unless they look like George Clooney or have enough money to attract a gold digger they are being really unrealistic.
As a young male, I also don't get any tinder swipes. It's not age discrimination haha.
@@653j521 that man is rich... and a celeb. Every Dutch person knows him or of him.
There was a guy a few years back that was filing hundreds of frivolous lawsuits from prison. However he would only demand small amounts of money; like a few hundred dollars. Since the companies would have to pay more to have a lawyer even step into a courtroom, many of these were simply paid.
I love how a couple of them seem sane until you hear the whole story.
“This guy sued the Dutch government about his age-“
Interesting. Age discrimination? Raising the retirement age?
“-so he could reduce his age and get more Tinder dates.”
…Never mind.
“-and compared his situation to transsexuality.”
Oh brother. 🙄😒😬
Someone needs to tell these people that being accepted on Tinder is not a legal right, or any sort of right, you are not owed a relationship, heavens sake.
If they did reduce his legal age, they could charge or sue him for doing various stuff before being old enough, such as driving and voting .
One would think writing that "my client is not the son of an orangutan." Would be the highlight of one's legal career considering how dry briefs can be.
I still say don't offer to pay 5 million to charity on a dare then renig when the dare is completed. Especially as someone with a net worth of $140 million. That'd be like me betting $1000 to charity then never paying up, shitty. And on national TV nonetheless, that's that punk sh!t
I don't think the Birth Certificate proved anything. Maher should have demanded a DNA test.
@@stephentorrey8727 bill mahr is jerk but it was very clearly satire to mark the claims Donald trump made. Which I'm pretty sure trump never followed through on either
@@stephentorrey8727 It should have somehow been related to exposing tax returns instead.
@@stephentorrey8727 snowflake
That prisoner case is genius. "Suing self for the damage caused to self, but because self is a ward of the state the state has to pay the damages"
Genius
That sounds like Cartman v.The World lol
You have to admit, it's a novel way to plead insanity.
On the topic of that case though, 23 years for breaking and entering and theft is surprisingly long, considering these days people get much lighter sentences for murder. Especially when alcohol was involved, generally makes them get even lighter senteces for being impaired.
It's not genius. If he's a ward of the state, that means the state would get the money too - you know because they're the ones responsible for him.
Being Dutch, I wondered who the hell the insane guy was that asked the judge to reduce his age. Then he showed that it was Emile Ratelband, and I thought: "Oh. Of course it's him. Should have known."
I’d like your comment but you have 69 likes…. So legally I can not.
Similar to the 4th case, my sister once joked about wanting to sue Clairol. There was a long ad campaign around Herbal Essences shampoo which clearly depicted women getting orgasms while using it. My sister tried it and never got one. At least my sister only joked about suing over an ad campaign.
Here in Spain, any lawsuit filed "in demonstrable bad faith" (read: frivolous) is automatically rejected by the judge and whoever files it has to pay both the judicial costs and a compensation to whoever was sued. So obviously, you see a lot less of these.
That's neat, What does the Spanish Judiciary uses for the system of Trial? I reckon most Nations that follows Trial by Judges (the case is decided by a Panel of Judges instead of a Panel of Jury) and uses Napoleonic Codes, Prussian Law code or Roman Law codes have some sort of "Assessment panel" for filed cases before said case is presented for public hearing.
It's a thing in Indonesia, where we use Dutch Law code, a Modified version of Napoleonic code with emphasis in Civil laws with Trial by Judges system. iirc The Plaintiff need to be assessed for intent first when both Parties conducting Discoveries and then evidences, should the intent is deemed by common law and the court to be valid, then the Case can proceed with the court issuing a panel of Judges for Public hearing. If not, the Court can reject the case for Hearing with the base of inappropriate filing of case or something like that
@@aribantala almost all of continental Europe, France, Spain, Italy and Germany for example, were conquered by Napoleon and therefore use a modern version of the Napoleonic code. The legal system in continental Europe is basically built on roman/french basis one could say.
US courts can also reject any lawsuits if it has bad or no basis. I know many times they take this types of lawsuits to set some sort of precedence.
@@nicoladonelli7121 I am totally aware of that 😄
Some part of Europe uses Jury based Trials. I am not really can pinpoint which besides the Obvious Anglo-Saxon code based UK.
Although I am not particularly aware that Germany uses Napoleonic code, instead they use Prussian code for Civil law, or is it a combination?
@@Nexus9118 And yet a judge can just ruin ppl's lives over his pants that where only delivered to the wrong place. Cause that's reasonable. The American justice system enabels those whit means to destroy those without. It's the opposite of justice.
Judge: "I wanted these pants for my first week on the bench!"
Other judges: "You wear pants under your robes?"
You joke, but I remember hearing about a judge who got in trouble for not only being naked under his robes, but also playing with himself during trials.
@@dude37 That person was definitely using some poor judgement.
@@dude37 yeah...i remember that. The judge was playing with a penis pump at trial.
He was here for a fun career, not a long one.
@@dude37 same, but I hear it's more common for female judges and they get caught less by being quieter.
He wanted to make himself 20 years younger.
So thats’s how jobs expect a 20 year old to have 30 years experience.
Can’t help but wonder what kinda ulterior motives the Judge might’ve had against the CHUNGS that might’ve led him to such an odd, irrational course of action.
I remember that one. I felt very sad for the Chungs (and still do). That judge's action should have been considered an assault. In fact, I think many lawsuits should be categorized as assault and prosecuted as such.
His divorce proceeding was similarly bizarre. The appeals court noted he filed 248 pre-trial motions. 248! As to how he's doing now, his most recent suit was against his landlord for raising his rent $400. Keep in mind the 10-year judgeship he squandered had a $105k salary.
Honestly, these are kinda scary in a weird way. It freaks me out to think that anyone can just sue you at any time and even if it's frivolous you still have to take the time and the money to deal with it.
The damage done since these lawsuites cost not only tax payers money but also legal fees for the defendants is the real damage.
Perhaps, but frivolous lawsuits are less problematic if they are not SLAPP suits. We should be changing the laws to ensure that SLAPP suits cant occur, while people still are not denied ease of ability to file lawsuits that at first may be considered frivolous but may alter establish a precedent.
That's basically the entire problem that patent scams exploit
The thing is, you don't. You can definitely just ignore it, show up in court without a dime paid, stand up and say "Lawsuit's frivolous."
Just won't turn out well if the court disagrees.
That's basically the US legal system in a nutshell. If you stall the case longer than the other party can afford, either in money or time, you win.
It's only the first frivolous case and I am already questioning the sanity of these people.
you're just "questioning", considering that implies you still have some hope there's some sanity still in there, that's very generous of you. lol
What is scary is the first one is a JUDGE.
What I want to know is why it took 13 years for him to be prohibited from practicing law for 90 days...
@@Faranya cuz court and cases take long, and because America
@@Faranya And also why it was only 90 days. I imagine he would be the laughing-stock of his entire district once word got out.
I heard about one in Toronto, Canada where the owner of a dark office building sued their neighbours for putting up a shiny reflective office building next to theirs. They claimed that the new tower raised their air conditioning costs. The matter was dropped after a year long energy usage study found that the shiny tower reduces the over all operating costs of the dark one by reducing the heating they need in the winter.
1:20 - Chapter 1 - The case of the 67M$ pants
5:15 - Chapter 2 - Age is just a number, a dutch court disagrees
7:55 - Chapter 3 - The man who sued himself (and everyone else)
11:05 - Chapter 4 - This bud is not for you
14:10 - Chapter 5 - Donald trump's monkey business
17:55 - End roll ads
“Because the constitution guarantees life and liberty, but it doesn’t guarantee a good time.”
Now THAT needs to be on Legal Eagle’s next merch. I really want a shirt that says that.
I like how Brad Stine once put it: "'Life, liberty, and the *pursuit* of happiness'. If you don't make it, it's your fault."
@@FriendlyFloyd7 : That's the Declaration of Independence. The Constitution goes back to John Locke's original trinity of life, liberty, and property (in the Due Process clauses of the 5th and 14th Amendments).
Not the law and not the Constitution. Legal Eagle screwed that up. It's the Declaration of Independence. Constitution is We the People and In order to form a more perfect Union.
@@megalocerus1573 : Leagle Eagle only said ‘life and liberty’, and those (along with property) are in the Constitution too. (The Fifth Amendment says that the feds cannot deprive us of them without due process, and the 14th Amendment says this of the States.)
It does make allowance for the "pursuit of happiness" which to me would seem to preclude limiting drug use or sexual activities. We are not guaranteed a good time... But we are guaranteed the right to chase a good time.
The one where someone filed a lawsuit against himself is probably the funniest one.
That's some serious Rudy Giuliani energy, there.
I am actually impressed tbh. That is a super creative way to scam taxpayers out of 5 million
that was the worst
I like that the judge basically said "hey that's pretty clever, definite points for originality, but no."
The real question is, by throwing the case out, did the man win or lose?
The age case also brings up the concern of adults changing their legal age to make Non-consetnual Child relationships technically legal by means of age comparison.
I’ve actually seen adult men identifying as little girls, because they want little boys to be their “boyfriend”. 🤢
My favourite strange case I ever saw was a guy suing the police for committing homicide against him - the claimant was alive and well
Law & Order started an episode with a man suing a dry cleaners for misplacing his pants. I didn't know it was one of their "ripped from the headlines" stories.
How much was he claiming on the show? Millions is obviously ridiculous but if a dry cleaner misplaced an expensive pair of trousers and refused to refund me I certainly wouldn't be happy..
i am friends with the actor who played the plaintiff. Mr Wiggins.
Digital Homicide Vs Jim Sterling is definitely up there for me.
If LegalEagle ever does it, I know he will be dying of laughing to death.
Definitely, considering how disgusting it was trying to spit in the face of free expression and trying to stop him doing his job.
I think it was officially Romine v. Stanton
@@cameroncanedo5982 yep that's correct.
@@SpartanPrimeDSTY117 Then alleged civil conspiracy. 🤣
How is it we end up with so many judges and other authorities that turn out to be raging lunatics.
Give some people an inch of power and they decide that they are a god.
Because lunatics are drawn to power like a moth to flame. That's why accountability of power is an absolute must.
Because almost anyone can run for elective office, and many of our judges are elected. The usual reason for electing judges rather than appointing them is to avoid the corruption which follows when the dominant political party chooses who is a judge. Lol
"Judge Pearson is not an unreasonable man"
Now, somehow I find that hard to believe
/s
Could you imagine the court reducing his age by 20 and what that would do to statutory rape allegations? "I know I'm 26, but I *feel* 17!"
Wow, great point! This would create so many issues in so many other cases!
Seems more likely that a minor would try to get their age raised but still a good point
Or somehow being 21 and now you're suddenly 1 damn year old.
I mean yes but on the other hand he is right about how you can change everything else lol
@@kevinthibodeau6813 Well the gender and name doesn't (or shouldn't) change how one is considered in a court of law.
"I move for a bad court thingy"
"You mean a mistrial?"
"Yeah! That's why you're the judge and I'm the law-talking guy"
"The lawyer"
I miss Phil Hartman
"This verdict is written on a cocktail napkin!
And it still says guilty!
And guilty is *spelled wrong* !"
@@pridelander06 I was going to say this!! 🤣😂🤣😂🤣
"He's had it in for me ever since I kinda ran over his dog"
"Well, replace the word kinda with repeatedly and dog with son"
@@Emelefpi Holy shit that's some great edgy humor 🤣
Old grouchy Post-Dubya Phil Hartman would've been a sight.
One of my favorite lawsuits I've seen was over a family tradition. Every year on a family members birthday, they would be given a dollar for whatever age they were turning. So for example if you were turning 25, you would get $25. Iirc a guy turned 36 and his father accidentally gave him $37 and demanded the extra dollar back. When the son refused, his father sued him for the extra dollar.
The father ultimately lost the suit because it was given as a gift and the father should have made sure he was giving the correct amount.
TBF, sounds like that dollar pay .0000000000000000000000001% of the therapy bills for a kid raised in that environment.
8:49 That’s what the Simpsons lawyer, Lionel Hutz, changed his business card to in the Itchy and Scratchy lawsuit.
“No money down” became “No, money down” and “Works on commission” became “works on commission?”
Im only fourteen but I would like to raise my age to 16 as my expertise in Mario Kart is proof that I’m able to drive.
That's completely valid. Driving in real life is way easier than Mario Kart. I support you all the way.
If that's your basis I want to lower my age: I can drive a real car, but I'm as bad at Mario Kart now as I was when I was my brother got the 64 Nintengo game ages ago.
Nice!
I hate this because I could totally see your pfp saying this
@@None-Trick_Pony Driving is real life often doesn't have bananas or shells in the road.
As someone who never had a problem with their local Korean cleaner/tailor shop, and misses them because my Dad and I used them for a combined 20+ years, I hate that judge for being such a twat to those shop owners.
Rise up Warriors of Nod!
I live in Australia, and I used to work at an accident injury law firm that dealt primarily in motor vehicle accidents, workers comp, and public liability law. The MVAs were usually legitimate. The Workers Comp were a bit of a mixed bag, but the majority of our public liability cases were complete bull. It used to annoy the hell out of me that my boss would take these cases. He had a "no win no fee" policy which meant all these frivolous lawsuits ended up costing him and the firm money, and the idiot client would skip away. The best one (to me) was a person who ducked under a hand rail to jump down a ramp at a casino and slipped and fell down said ramp instead. The person did the wrong thing, hurt themselves then tried to sue Crown Casino. The biggest casino conglomerate in Australia. It still baffles me why my boss bothered with this case. Our dinky 11 person law firm could not take on Crown, especially when our client was CLEARLY in the wrong. That cost my boss several hundred thousand dollars.
The idea of "beer commercials" is so weird, because where I live beer commercials (or any alcohol for that matter) are totally illegal. I have never seen a single ad for alcohol!
“100% Satisfaction Guaranteed” means about the same thing as “World’s best cup of coffee”; nothing.
But it commonly limited by the original contract value. If you get a meal that tastes bad you can expect that you can get the meal cost waived, but you are not getting to take ownership of the restaurant. If they burn your steak you can expect to be made whole, which is either no charge or a new steak. He might have won if he was asking for the cost of the dry cleaning or at worst the cost to replace the pants because he needed them prior to them finding them again. Imagine killing your career because you wanted to wreck a drycleaner.
When I call myself the world’s best cup of coffee I mean it and can substantiate it with evidence.
@@andrewt.5567 Probably a bit of racism underneath it all
It’s illegal to say that in the U.K., since it is explicitly a lie, or at least unfalsifiable. All your claims must be proven, or you can’t make them. I think this is a good way of doing things.
There's a car wash around here that says "100% satisfaction guaranteed or your dirt back".
Regarding the "legally changing your birthdate" idea, imagine this scenario:
A man commits murder at the age of 18. Five years later, he fears that the truth will come out, and he will be put on trial, so he legally changes his birthdate to five years later.
"I couldn't have done it, I was only 13!"
Or "I cannot stand trial as an adult, I am only 13!". For both reasons, the court was 100% right to bar this BS.
@@jinxhead4182 Well, technically, in the fake scenario, he would legally be 18 at the time of the trial. But yes, had I said six years or more, he couldn't even be put on trial. Which honestly is what some people fantasize, forever remaing children without having massive repercussions for the horrible things they do
someone could change their birthdate to get out of a statutory rape charge
@UCS32HYfSEO4VGvaKIYJlWGw I mean, I guess then it technically, legally never happened? As was in the video itself, erasing any amount of time from one's life makes any event that happened in that time to stop existing.
@@andrews3271 Yeah, exactly, that would be incredibly dangerous, and as the court explained, it would allow people to basically change the past, from a legal standpoint.
One thing I always think of when I hear the ter "frivolous Lawsuit" is the Digital Homicide versus Jim Sterling case where the Romine brothers tried to sue video game critic James Stephanie Sterling, for covering their games in a negative light.
11:06 This reminds me of the story of the person who tried to sue Pepsi over a Harrier Jet. Because the Pepsi Points commercial at the time included a Harrier Jet with an attached points value. The person lost because no reasonable person would believe that they could get a fully functioning active military(at the time) jet. Pepsi promptly changed the commercial to up the required point value for the jet and add a disclaimer that you can't actually get the jet.
In Australia it's actually illegal to advertise alcohol and cigarettes.
So that one where the guy sued about the beer commercial would have gone an entirely different direction in Australia.
Spuds Mackenzie ads probably wouldn't be legal today(I've not checked the years of alcohol laws), but the 80s were a wild and exciting time.
I mean, it'd still be incredibly petty and spiteful nontheless.
@@gengarzilla1685 hey man, being incredibly petty with major corporations is funny
Here in the UK advertising is subject to pretty strict (and somewhat nebulous) regulations, if people have issues with an advert they normally complain to the regulatory body rather than SUING THE DANG COMPANY.
It is not really legal in the US. I mean, if you sued they might do it, but you cannot compel TV stations to run such ads. Effectively societal custom prohibits it.
I wanna sue past me for negligence and poor decision making
Sue future you instead, it’s an easier case to make.
If you sue your past self, how could you ever collect damages?
Me too
@@blueberry1c2 make the state pay on your past self's behalf xD
I agree, not buying Bitcoins at $40 each when I had the chance was one bad decision.
I feel sorry for the couple that lost their dry cleaning business because of one idiot thought he can make a quick buck and what's much crazy about that case was there were attempted copycats I think after that case most dry cleaners started having security cameras that way they can use as proof in case stuff like this happens again
It's really sad that some people are so petty that they don't even want to win the lawsuit. They just wanna screw over someone else by getting them tangled in a drawn out court case.
I find it oddly wholesome that instead of lying about his age on tinder (like a lot of people), he instead decided to attempt legally changing his age 😂
He just wanted to be honest! ...in his own way 😂
I'm trying to understand how he thinks saying he's twenty years younger is supposed to make a difference. It won't make him look younger.
@@angelad3170 for real and homie tried to blame his age for not being able to get chicks
@@angelad3170 His logic was that he looked 20 younger than he was and he was being rejected purely on the basis of age, and I mean tbh he does look more like 55-60 than 69 so he might have some sort of point. The solution however is not to allow people to legally change their age but rather to have your age be legally protected information just like medical information, rather than your ID showing your date of birth it could show whether you're over 18, over 21, or over 70, with the over 21 and over 70 being optional, and with no laws against lying about your own age unless you are lying about being over 18 while under 18, under 18 while over 18, over 21 while under 21, or over 70 while under 70, all other lies about age should be fine. The only other way to view your official age would be for medical professionals, courts, and certain government agencies. This is no different to how you can have a disability card without it having to list your actual disability.
@@giorgitsiklauri840 Why would your age be legally protected information? People dating you have the right to know your age. You don't have the right to have a date.
I'd like to suggest the flip to this video: lawsuits that appear to be frivolous but actually are not (you mentioned the McDonald's hot coffee suit in the pinned comment)
Yes please
@Luís Andrade mcdonalds launched a smear campaign against the victim to make it seem like a frivolous lawsuit. Coffee burns but it isn't supposed to burn THAT much. Consider if you accidentally touched laundry detergent and it melted off your skin. You're not supposed to touch laundry detergent, but the company that made that detergent would still be liable because clearly the detergent was unusually dangerous.
Check out 'Adam Ruins Everything - The Truth About the McDonald's Coffee Lawsuit' here on RUclips for the little-known details about that lawsuit.
@@Northflowo Remember learning about this in my legal studies class! The smear campaign definitely worked. At first everyone laughed with a “How could she be so stupid?” But no one was laughing when he showed the burns.
@Luís Andrade Dude the coffee was 190 degrees, hot enough to give third degree burns. Coffee is supposed to be around 140, McDonald’s made it that way cause it was cheaper. Have you seen the photos? She had to get a ton of skin grafts. Not a walk in the park, nor worth it for the money
The scariest part of the first case was that this person was a judge. What kind of decisions did he make about law while on the bench?
The "I'm being dishcriminated against on tinder!!" verdict was of course correct and very clearly explained, but I wish they'd granted his insane request, just to show him how much of a difference that (didn't) make.
I had to laugh when you addressed the Emile Ratelband case. That guy is considered a bit of a nutcase over here in the Netherlands, many of us just thought "there we go again" when he started that lawsuit... :)
Didn't he file that lawsuit to make a point about transgender rights?
@@thesupergreenjudy he claimed that after he didn't get the support he expected
it was not after hazing started he started about the transgenders
the transgender's were also not happy about being involved into that mess
Weird Al Yankovic has a song on this subject called "I'll Sue Ya!", where he basically goes around suing everyone over anything and everything. Like suing Home Depot for selling him a hammer they knew he might drop on his toes. Or suing Verison every time his cellphone is roaming.
Those were all real cases he's bringing up in the song.
"if i can change my gender on my birth certificate, then i can change my age" - in case anyone actually does want to know why it's different:
it's not like the birth certificate says "mature" or "immature", it says a date. you have a certain amount of time you have been alive; that is sufficient to determine age and immutable. it is only the reactions of others to your apparent age that you have problems with
on the other hand the recording of gender is actually an assumption, typically based on the shape of a baby's external genitalia. that works a lot of the time, but that one gender-related attribute alone can prove insufficient to determine gender, and/or is mutable. it is not merely the reactions of others to your apparent gender; it actually is or becomes inaccurate, and therefore change should be allowed
Emiel Ratelband is such a weird cult hero/villain in the Netherlands. The moment you mentioned him I started laughing, because of course it's him!
The TEN MILLION DOLLARS lawsuit filed against Jim Sterling by the game "developers" Digital Homicide is my all time favourite frivolous lawsuit. If you have the chance you should absolutely check it out, it's a hell of a ride.
You got a good video for it
Imagine the face of the judge reading the complaint.
@@andrewdoidge5370 Jim sterling has a video detailing the lawsuit and oh God it is madness.
Leonard French covered some of the court documents on RUclips.
Andrew Doidge Fred Knudson's _Down the Rabbit Hole_ summarizes the case in excellent fashion.
My favourite thing about Mr. Ratelband is that he thought the judge was actually agreeing with him rather than mocking him.
Gotta admire that postive outlook.
Emile Ratelband used to be a motivational speaker, so he tends to see things in a positive light.
I knew about this lawsuit, but I always thought he was doing a publicity stunt or something while mocking far left gender politics.
@@Requiem4u A nutcase AND a bigot, a great combo
Tsjakkaa!
ha ha I love your videos, in fact years ago I wrote an article on frivolous litigation in my country, quoting the pants and the beer's cases. Good job!
If anything, I think drinking a beer that actually made you hallucinate being on a beach with skateboarding dogs would be better grounds for a lawsuit
Totally agree in the word-for-word description, but as a parent, I do understand his position regarding over-glamourising alcohol to kids. I don't think his intent was frivolous, just the way he went about it.
In the UK, certain items nowadays can't be advertised on any kids' TV channel, before 9pm (aka the "watershed", when all younger children are expected to be in bed. This was established when _I_ was a kid, and now I'm a gran!), or during any children's programmes. Btw, we have _very_ strict standards for advertising in general - no prescription-only medicines are allowed _at all._
The "kids' list" includes alcohol, all tobacco advertising, including vaping I think (I rarely watch TV these days), anything sexual, and junk food. Possibly other stuff; it's a common sense law.
The only downside is we no longer get Hamlet cigar ads. They were funny!
@@y_fam_goeglyd Yeah, if his motivation was to stop the over-glamorizing but his only legal way about it was to claim false advertising that's understandable.
I don't think alcohol really needs advertisisements to be successful, people are pretty jazzed about it anyway. I get that individual brands want to make their own seem the most alluring but it's probably hard to do that without glamorizing alcohol as a whole.
But at least if your commercial is like... a couple enjoying a nice glass of wine for their dinner that's probably not gonna make a child think it seems fun, just boring adult stuff.
@@y_fam_goeglyd Whereas a beach with skateboarding dogs is like a kid's dream
"Judge Pierson demanded satisfaction"
I really thought he was going to challenge them for a duel there.
Or a happy ending 😊
If they apologize, no need for further action
Honestly, can we bring back dueling? It would get rid of a lot of frivolous lawsuits and idiots.
@@Quinntus79 In some states, "mutual combat" is a thing, but it's unarmed combat only.
@@whitneywujkoayala8613
If they don’t, grab a friend, that’s your second: your lieutenant when there’s reckoning to be reckoned.
Now do "frivolous-sounding suits that turned out genuinely meritous". Like the time a MacDonalds franchise made unsafely hot coffee and the resulting burns to a poor woman were medically serious.
Yeah, that one is often cited as a textbook frivolous lawsuit, but the coffee served by McDonald's was 20 degrees farenheit hotter than any of their competitors, which reduced the time of exposure to cause burns from 20 seconds to 3, and their packaging was not particularly safe. As a result the woman in question was seriously burned and had permanent disfiguring injuries. She asked McDonald's to pay $20,000 (the cost of her treatment plus her daughter's loss of income due to caring for her). McDonald's offered $800.
I think the woman admitted she was partially at fault because she shouldn't have had the coffee open in a car, but the fact that the burns were so bad, and that there were multiple also people reporting burns (albeit nowhere near as bad) made a court decide McDonald's was still responsible.
Another one he could talk about was the lesbian couple suing the cake store for posting their personal information online. Or the aunt that sued her nephew for an injury that the entire family believed insurance would never cover otherwise.
@@metademetra Exactly. It's her fault that she got injured, but McDonald's fault that the injuries were horrific. Everybody knows that spilling coffee in your lap hurts, but it's not supposed to put you in hospital.
@@beeble2003 If McD's coffee was so hot that it was causing serious burns (as it had in the past), they should not have been serving it at the drive thru. Spills are way more likely in a moving car, and they would know that.
@@julietardos5044 Yes, I know. Any cup of hot coffee is going to injure you, but normal coffee won’t give you debilitating injuries.
If he had lowered his age by 20 years, then did he technically retro-actively commit voter fraud when he voted as a young adult?
The fact that there isn't a system of compensation for victims of frivilous lawsuits is absurd
If I remember correctly, a gambling company in Australia sued a terminally ill whistleblower over and over again until he had to sell his house because of the legal fees
Isn't that the guy who got cancer later?
@@voxlknight2155 yup
"Where there's a will, there's a lawsuit." That should be America's slogan.
It's a great pun, too
There was once an RPG called, "Where there's a will, there's a murder". I never played it and I don't know the game mechanics but I used to see (decades ago) advertising for it.
Ill sue you because im bored
Naw, it should be Germany’s slogan. They have nearly twice as many lawsuits per capita per year as the US.
@@unconventionalideas5683 Didn't know that, Germans are showing the Americans how it's done.
I'd really like to see you break down the McDonald's Happy Meal lawsuit where a guy sued McDonald's over the Happy Meal because he got depressed after eating it.
I couldn't believe it was real but it was.
You said "McDonald's" and I thought it was going a different place, I like this one much better
What if I'm already depressed and the happy meal doesn't make me happy?
Do I have a case?
@@Rune3100 Yep. Learning about a grandma getting third degree burns to her private parts was very distressing. A sad man eating a Happy Meal is a better image.
The one I'd like to hear about is the time a woman tried to sue the Quaker Oats Company because she felt calling the Cap'n Crunch cereal "Crunch Berries" was misleading and false advertising, as they aren't real berries. The best part of the story is the judge dismissing the case because, "[the] survival of the instant claim would require this Court to ignore all concepts of personal responsibility and common sense."
Billy Mitchell could fill this entire list himself
This would stop pretty promptly, if the plaintiffs of these frivolous lawsuits had to pay the cost of the charged party's costs, in case they lose.
The problem is, this could also stop legitimate lawsuits if the defendant is a rich guy and hires a really expensive lawyer which the plaintiff couldn't possibly afford to pay for. The rich guy might actually hire such an expensive lawyer on purpose to deter lawsuits, frivolous or not.
The dude that tried to get his age reduced by 20 years is a real weirdo. This it's far from the first incredibly weird thing he's done. Over here in the Netherlands we really don't take him serious anymore
If you don't mind can you summarize a few of the other things he's done? I'm very curious
Tjakka! 😂
He's quite (in)famous in Germany as well. Definitely triggered some 90ies TV flashbacks seeing him again 😄
@@MtnNerd Seconded. I'd love to hear about his other exploits.
One of my favorite lawsuit stories is of the guy in Pennsylvania who sued the Devil for making his life miserable. The Judge eventually threw the case out on the basis that the defendant was not a resident of the State.
Of course, technically, the Devil was doing his job, and you can't sue someone for THAT! And EVERYONE knows the Devil lives in New Jersey!🤣🤣
And the only record we have of him travelling the country was that time he went down to Georgia
I've been watching your videos for quite a while. A fun insight into the American judicial system. I was surprised to see my own country and legal system featured in one of your videos. Here in law school in the Netherlands, we talked about Ratelband's case quite a bit. Fun case to talk about.
13:00 yay Kzoo was my hometown for 20 years awesome to hear a RUclipsr mention where you live(d)
I once read about a guy who sued his parents for having him because they “didn’t get his consent to be born” first, or something like that. Utter craziness
I mean that's actually doesn't sound that bad if he can prove that his life involves considerable suffering.
@@deus_ex_machina_ He didn’t hate them, actually he loves them. He just wanted to make a point, actually he wanted a rupee as compensation(less than a dollar).
It was more as a point of his anti natalism belief, about how we are forced to born in a world that will make us experience suffering or discomfort one way of another. It’s pretty weird.
i mean he's technically not wrong
@@deus_ex_machina_ he may be right in the fact that he didn't get the consent to be born.
But that doesn't mean that you must sue your parents over it. Nobody can possibly give consent to be born. I can't imagine how someone can seriously agree with this lawsuit.
I went to nursing school with a guy who sued his parents for having him circumcised when he was an infant.
Oh I remember the orangutan one! I used it in my journalism class when we were learning about freedom of speech, libel, and slander! It would be classified as satirical and therefore holds no water in a court of law.
The Orange One needs better lawyers and has for many years.
@@jamesweekley1087 the Orange One needs to be a better person.
You earned my subscription with your laconic approach and most importantly putting your plug at the end of your video. 🎉
I love your videos man they’re so well made and you do such a great job - super entertaining!!
"Where there's a will, there's a lawsuit."
Estate attorneys: It do be like that sometimes.
Only sometimes? ;D My great-uncle was helping me through college on the basis of a verbal agreement we had and everything was going smooth as silk--and then he had a stroke. His lawyer, who I called 'Wormtongue' because he was a double-talking ass, got power of attorney and that's when getting the money to cover the costs my uncle and I had agreed he'd cover became akin to pulling teeth. When my uncle died, I'm surprised all my hair didn't turn grey from the stress of wondering when money to cover the COSTS THAT MONEY FROM MY UNCLE WAS SUPPOSED TO COVER was going to arrive. I was NOT AMUSED when I found out, months later, the lawyer hadn't informed me that the fund my uncle had been drawing money from to help me out was basically empty. I had no idea when my uncle died how long it takes to settle a will--and he hadn't named an executor (I know there's a term for it but I can't remember how to spell it. ;D) so that made it take even longer. GAAAAAH! I finally tried to step up and be named executor, but the state I was living in required the person who'd died to own land in that state for me to be named executor. XP My uncle's lawyer was named executor, and I ended up being screwed out of money I *should* have gotten to cover costs MY UNCLE AND I HAD AGREED HE WOULD COVER. Color me PISSED AS HELL. I had absolutely no idea how to fight it, so I took comfort in the fact all the money I didn't get went to my uncle's alma mater. If I'd had any idea how to sue for the money, I absolutely would have.
I never get tired of old Simpsons episodes used for meme purposes
Season 3-10 are 8 seasons of pure memery.
@@mykaruest3620 or any season with lionel hutz
@@axeavier rip Phil Hartman
@@EdibleClown Phil Hartman died too soon. It depresses me that he was starting to get to Mel Blanc levels in his career and it was cut way too damn short.
@@mykaruest3620 I'll never forget "Hi I'm Troy McClure from such self help videos as Smoke Yourself Thin and Get Confident, Stupid"
One thing I'd add to the Ratelband case is that it's quite likely to have been an ideological PR stunt. Mr Ratelband was (still is, I suppose) notorious for statements that, let me put it this careful way, may easily be interpreted as immensely homophobic, transphobic, and anti-semitic. So I'm not quite certain he was serious about the whole age stuff.
"You can sue anyone for anything at anytime" sounds like an excellent way to financially ruin someone innocent, since they have to spend money and time defending against something fake. It's like you can buy a service at anytime, and you also obligate another party to participate into buying into that service, whether they want to or not, at least if both parties are responsible for their own legal fees.
I'm sure there is some vague, hard to prove/disprove accusation that is an easy go-to for a malicious actor. Is there any sort of penalty for that, so as to deter such behaviour?
i believe what you're referring to is malicious prosecution, and in that case it seems like, generally speaking, if you can prove the other person was malicious legally speaking (intending to harm someone without good reason, not just being a buzzkill), you can typically get the money back
You forgot the copyright lawsuit by peta about the monkey selfie. That seemed extremely frivolous and the photographer has later stated in an interview that he is considering dog walking because he can't pay any of his legal expenses anymore.
I think it's LOOOOONG time someone shut down PETA by now.
Like when they kill all of that lobsters by puting them in a river and not the ocean and they drown, or when they kill over 90% of the pets they "care" or maybe that time.... you get it at this point
@@MasterZebulin I don't know how they weren't shut down by their own people after openly killing people's pets.
PETA is a domestic terrorist organization and you can't convince me otherwise. They've been caught funneling money to, and training, eco terrorists back in the 90s and early 2000s. Some of whom did millions of dollars in arson damage.
That photographer should have crowd funded a defense fun and counter sued PETA for as much as he could have. ENough people hate PETA they'd donate and pretty sure some high profile lawyers would love to rip their crooked legal teams a new one.
Lawyer Emert Wyss convinced his client to sue her mortgage company because they charged her $60 in fax fees. When she agreed, he started a class action lawsuit and hired like 4 other law firms to help handle the case, but then it turned out Emert Wyss‘ own title company was the one that had collected the $60 fax fees and was added as a defendant to the case.
So he ended up accidentally suing himself.
D’oh! 🤦🏻♂️ Do you know how that ended?
"The priority must be to ensure that the public registers contain accurate and factual information." What an interesting sentiment
What’s so interesting about that?
I love how you added Lionel Hutz's ad on your video with the whole. "No, Money Down!"
As a young male, I also don't get any tinder swipes. It's not age discrimination haha.
Keep on going bro, eventually. No rush.
That is because women on there dont even know guys have the option to swipe "no". For some reason the better looking guys will play downward for easy action. Girls who are 4 an 5s are getting dudes who are 8s. Some of the girls literally have to keep calendars to track their dates. And not necessarily the good looking ones. So if you are a 5 guy trying to talk to a 5 girl you are being pushed out by a bunch of 8 guy. Girls absolutely can swing upward on there. If you are a 5 guy, you are probably limited to girls that are a trainwreck.
@@andrewt.5567 That's also because more guys than girls use the app I think.
Get a dapper haircut and groom your eyebrows, it does a world of good 😍
@@katyungodly How did you know I have bushy eyebrows.
I read about a guy that sued his medical school for failing him; they had not taken into account his handicap, that he got very nervous during tests.
Yeah, that is someone I want to be my doctor...
Reminds me of the joke "What do you call the guy who graduates last in his class from medical school? Doctor."
Test anxiety does not make a bad doctor. Test scenarios are different than real world applications and there's a lot more stress involved. I'm not saying the lawsuit had merit (I don't know enough about the case), just that there are plenty of people who are good at their job that don't test well.
Edit: in fact, there are studies showing that testing in medical school is unrelated to academic performance. I have the link, here, but I think YT would delete my comment if I link it, so I'm just going to give the title of the study I found: Test anxiety in medical school is unrelated to academic performance but correlates with an effort/reward imbalance
I've heard a couple of equally silly ones: I found them online so of course I can't verify their veracity.
A woman who had just given birth sued the hospital because childbirth wasn't the ecstatically joyous experience she thought it would be.
and a woman shot by the police during an armed robbery sued the police - not for shooting her, but for releasing her from prison after serving a sentence for a previous crime.
Her argument was that if she hadn't been released, she wouldn't have been able to commit the second crime and so wouldn't have been shot, so it was all the police's fault.
That she had the option not to commit the crime during which she got shot doesn't seem to have occurred to be
I heard a story about a man who had just graduated from medical school. He was involved in a fight outside a bar and slashed a guy with a broken bottle.
He lost his medical license.
Died at the little "No, Money Down!" bit.
Ahh, a judge abusing his authority right off the bat, what a... thing?
Love the 1-800-GET-HELP ad, Nice Lionel Hutz reference "No, Money Down!"
Work on contingency? No, money down! Oops shouldn't have this bar association logo on here either.
It’s pretty nasty that anybody can essentially shut down a business through frivolous litigation.
Another gaping flaw in American society.
The transition into the skillshare promotion was smooth as all hell