Justice the American Way!!!

Ok, a friend just e-mailed me this, and probably a lot of you got it too, but I thought it was good. I don�t know if it�s real yet, but it is funny� and believable!

A man from Charlotte, North Carolina, having purchased a case of very
expensive cigars, insured them against, among other things, fire. Within a
month, having smoked his entire stockpile, the man filed a claim against
the insurance company, stating that the cigars were lost "in a series of
small fires."

The insurance company refused to pay, citing the obvious reason that the
man had consumed the cigars in the normal fashion. The man sued - and won.

In delivering the ruling the judge, agreeing that the claim was frivolous,
stated nevertheless that the man held a policy from the company in which it
had warranted that the cigars were insurable and also guaranteed that it
would insure against fire, without defining what it considered to be
"unacceptable fire", and was obliged to pay the claim. Rather than endure a
lengthy and costly appeal process the insurance company accepted the ruling
and paid the man $15,000 for the rare cigars he lost in "the fires."

After he cashed the cheque, however, the company had him arrested on 24
counts of arson. With his own testimony from the previous case being used
against him, the man was convicted of intentionally burning his insured
property and sentenced to 24 months in jail and a $24,000 fine.

Dumbass...

DeltaChaos

I had actually read that this was an urban legend. Do you have a source? It sounded like something someone would try to do.

Originally posted by junglejake
Do you have a source?

Uh yeah, I do. My stupid ex-girlfriend's even stupider friend. Who knows where she got it. I make sure that I don't get a lot of crap e-mail anymore, but I used to get about 10 of these things a day.

Great story. Probably crap.

DC

Lol, ok, then for now, I'll assume my info is right unless I see this thread pop up again

hehehehe, that sounds about right! Probably a bogus story, but all the same, it illustrates perfectly some of the bull# lawsuits!

man if this is true, it is funny as hell.
I guess he would have got what he deserved.

Originally posted by parrhesia
hehehehe, that sounds about right! Probably a bogus story, but all the same, it illustrates perfectly some of the bull# lawsuits!

That is absloutly valid! I actually come from a family of lawyers, and some of the lawsuits they defend against are rediculous! We need, in my opinion, some kind of legal reform where there's much stiffer penalties if you file a frivolous lawsuit.

I was just out smokin' some cigarettes and thinkin' about this thing.

Isn't it the judges job to interpret the word of the law and then prosecute the spirit of the law?

I bet that insurance company would have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to rewrite thier policies, inform thier clients, and then bring in consultants to see where else they might have to pay some shmuck 15 grand. Only then to raise premiums to cover the expense.

I think there should be a law that says that a judge can call bull# on these idiots who sue just to sue.

But then, I don't think a judge could really ever sentence a man to 24 months for smoking cigars and being a smartass about it.

DC

The problem with giving the judges the power to throw out bull schiesse cases is that they could do it to any case, and just call it BS. The judges should have to hear the case, but the loser should have to pay all the court and lawyer costs. Making a company pay $400,000 to WIN a frivolous case is rediculous. They lose both ways, so they'll just settle for the $350,000, and people here on ATS will assume guilt.

Not true.

www.snopes.com...

Snopes is your friend. Use the Snopes.

-B.

...and people here on ATS will assume guilt.

That's funny. do you think that's funny? I think it's funny.

There should also be a law against assuming guilt. That would actually be more productive. Hell, there should be laws against everything... A law against making more laws would be the first one I write.

I can't believe I just became the 'their ought to be a law' guy. Nobody likes that guy!

DC

Originally posted by Banshee
Not true.

www.snopes.com...

Snopes is your friend. Use the Snopes.

-B.

I think that was my source, too Very useful for weeding out them urban legends.

Hey Banshee... NICE FACE!!!

Damn where are all the sexual innuendo smileys when you need them?


DC

That is a hilarious story and is an Urban Legend. Snopes has an entry for it, Snopes - I have to say that it is less outlandish than some of the lawsuits people would file against places I have worked. Those I could not laugh at. And yes, my employers would always settle out of court to avoid the press and expense.
[edit] Ya beat me. Man, you guys work fast! Sorry for piling on.

[Edited on 8-4-2004 by Spectre]

Verdict: FALSE

Originally posted by DeltaChaos

...and people here on ATS will assume guilt.

That's funny. do you think that's funny? I think it's funny.

There should also be a law against assuming guilt. That would actually be more productive. Hell, there should be laws against everything... A law against making more laws would be the first one I write.

I can't believe I just became the 'their ought to be a law' guy. Nobody likes that guy!

DC

I think it's funny, but I also think it's disturbing. Whenever people, ATS people included, see that a company settled, they seem to assume the party is guilty. Heck, a lot of the time if a company is charged with something, they're assumed guilty by people.

I'd like to know, why this hatred for business? If it wasn't for business, you wouldn't have your ATS, you wouldn't have your computer, you woulnd't have your phone, your car, your house, or anything. You'd be living in a hut, hunting and gathering. Business is good. Business isn't evil.

I think maybe somebody needs a nap...

Actually, I hadn't considered any of those things you just said, but now that I have, you know what? I don't know. I have my opinion, but it's too late in the day for that. I read the thing, I laughed my ass off, and thought I'd share.

Sure wish I could discuss the smaller workings of the judicial system of a self-centered society with you, but like I said in another thread, "I'm so frickin' high I'd probably make that mistake again!"

Doopty-Doo!
DeltaChaos

and I'm a wee bit tipsy and have been up for over 20 hours. I do need a nap, I'm just not sure why you thought I needed one I do believe what I wrote, though, when I'm sentient, too.

Wee bit tipsy, huh. So you do need nap! Either that or drink more, more faster. Right?

A post on my blog is going to be all about illicit drugs and experiences with alcohol. I feel it is a topic not widely enough discussed in this place where clearly upwards of 90% of us regularly abuse these substances. I think that there should be a place on ATS for serious discussion and dialogue on this topic, among others shamefully neglected.

Like raunchy sex. Where did you do them? What did you do them with? Do you have pictures? Things like that.

So look for the DeltaBlog coming soon!

DC

Originally posted by DeltaChaos
Wee bit tipsy, huh. So you do need nap! Either that or drink more, more faster. Right?

A post on my blog is going to be all about illicit drugs and experiences with alcohol. I feel it is a topic not widely enough discussed in this place where clearly upwards of 90% of us regularly abuse these substances. I think that there should be a place on ATS for serious discussion and dialogue on this topic, among others shamefully neglected.

Like raunchy sex. Where did you do them? What did you do them with? Do you have pictures? Things like that.

So look for the DeltaBlog coming soon!

DC

Lol, well, as far as the sex aspect goes, I wouldn't really be able to participate in that. I've only had one partner, and that was in my pre-christian days.

The drug thing, however, I would be interested in. I think there are many many many conspiracies related to the industry, substances, and legeslation when it comes to the drug industry.

Did you know, for example, that pot was a "lower class" drug that was popular with blacks in the 40s and 50s, so it was made illegal? I don't know about you, but I think that was a conspiracy to jail more black people!