Overlawyered: Chronicling The High Cost Of Our Legal System

7 Comments

  • Well of course. Any government that claims it has the power and ability to control the climate ought in fairness be held to account for its failure to predict the weather. Duh.

  • cloud

    its more than that. if we can change the climate, than surely we can change the weather itself.

    Of course to be fair, the predictions that there would be no turbulance were based on data collected from East Anglia and after the plane dropped 200 feet in 2 seconds, they quickly worked to “hide the decline.”

    • By A.W.

  • There was an unsucessful case (Cunard v. United States) in the Southern District of New York along the same lines. Cunard Lines claimed that the United States did not chart a known shoal, and their ship, the QE2, ran aground in 1992 off of Martha’s Vineyard as a result, causing 20 million in damages to the ship.

    http://www.hydro-international.com/issues/articles/id1071-Grounding_of_the_Queen_Elizabeth.html

    In the Cunard case it is arguable that the court made a bad decision. The flight attendant case, in contrast, seems to be a sure loser.

    • By VMS

  • I think back when I first discovered this site there was a similair story. It was about a boater that sued a weatherman after his boat captsized during a storm. Weatherman hadn’t predicted any storms. If I remember correctly the case was tossed. Think it was on the east coast.

    • By Waste9

  • What’s the matter, couldn’t they get a current address for somebody to serve god?*

    (*PS Not that I believe in god, flying chairs or politicians with integrity, as I see no evidence any of these exist.)

  • As usual, this isn’t about viability of the claim, it’s about the deepness of the pockets and the lack of commitment to defend – you think this government is going to decline to give another plaintiff’s lawyer a bounty in settlement?

    • By Bob Neal

  • Amy, did you forget about Bob Knight (or Detroit Pistons fans) re: flying chairs? (LOL)