Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

macintologist · Jul 28, 2007, 04:08 PM

I was watching an episode of Bullshit where this handicapped lawyer made legal threats to a bunch of supposedly non-compliant restaurants, demanding a settlement of $2500. It seems that $2500 is the perfect amount of money where if you fight the case, you'll end up spending more on $2500 in legal fees.

So can I just go sue anyone for any reason and demand a $2000-$2500 settlement? So the respondent will pay up fearing that legal fees could go higher than that?

design219 · Jul 28, 2007, 04:32 PM

If they were actually non-compliant with handicap codes, then they should pay up. That would probably be the most expedient way to get compliance, as they would not want it to happen again.

Then again, the guy is a lawyer, so there is a very good chance he is just a blood sucking scum bag.

Sky Captain · Jul 28, 2007, 05:36 PM

You have to follow through with the threat.
Otherwise it's breech of due process.

Jawbone54 · Jul 28, 2007, 06:34 PM

Originally Posted by design219

Then again, the guy is a lawyer, so there is a very good chance he is just a blood sucking scum bag.

QFT!
I do know a few lawyers that are okay, but they're assistant DAs.

ghporter · Jul 28, 2007, 06:52 PM

If there is a good basis for the suit, yes, you can do this. Small claims court is a wonder when it comes to making a company pay attention-they often fail to even send someone to request a different court and you win by default. In Texas small claims court goes up to $5000, and you bring the suit at a justice of the peace court. Fees are $10 for filing and sometimes another $15 for citations and other documents.

In many cases, small claims is used as a form of leverage-it WILL cost a corporation much more than the $5000 to get a lawyer to do the whole workup on a case and to appear and defend the company against the suit-which may be decided against the company anyway. But since this sort of thing (in Texas anyway) goes before a JP, there's a level of "just how stupid is this case anyway" screening that goes on. I would not bring a clearly frivolous suit before a Texas JP-I'd be likely to spend a lot of money in fines for "bringing a stupid suit" and "wasting my time."

CMYKid · Jul 28, 2007, 09:33 PM

Originally Posted by design219

If they were actually non-compliant with handicap codes, then they should pay up. That would probably be the most expedient way to get compliance, as they would not want it to happen again.

The two are hardly related...paying to settle a suit doesn't make your business compliant. If anything you'd be on the hook for future liabilities unless you spent the additional money to upgrade your facilities.

design219 · Jul 28, 2007, 10:30 PM

Originally Posted by CMYKid

The two are hardly related...paying to settle a suit doesn't make your business compliant. If anything you'd be on the hook for future liabilities unless you spent the additional money to upgrade your facilities.

That's my point. Think of it as a rather inexpensive wake up call that you have better get compliant or you will keep getting this kind of thing.

macintologist · Jul 28, 2007, 11:49 PM

I mean I heard this story about a woman who would "accidentally" slip in someone's house and then sue them later, demanding a settlement of anywhere between 1 and 10 grand. But how can that be possible? Don't you have to prove some sort of mal-intent on the part of the homeowner?

Chuckit · Jul 29, 2007, 09:44 AM

Originally Posted by macintologist

I mean I heard this story about a woman who would "accidentally" slip in someone's house and then sue them later, demanding a settlement of anywhere between 1 and 10 grand. But how can that be possible? Don't you have to prove some sort of mal-intent on the part of the homeowner?

Neglect is sufficient in many cases. If you leave a knife dangling on the edge of a bookshelf, it doesn't work just to say, "Well, sorry, I'm a dumbass!"

ghporter · Jul 29, 2007, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by macintologist

I mean I heard this story about a woman who would "accidentally" slip in someone's house and then sue them later, demanding a settlement of anywhere between 1 and 10 grand. But how can that be possible? Don't you have to prove some sort of mal-intent on the part of the homeowner?

This is a common scam - and why a lot of business initially installed video surveillance systems. You can often catch such "victims" setting up their "falls" and even doing trial runs.

I don't let ANYONE in my house that I don't' trust and that I don't monitor and accompany 100% of the time. No, I'm not a trusting person. I don't get sued, either.

macintologist · Jul 29, 2007, 10:07 AM

Originally Posted by ghporter

This is a common scam - and why a lot of business initially installed video surveillance systems. You can often catch such "victims" setting up their "falls" and even doing trial runs.

I don't let ANYONE in my house that I don't' trust and that I don't monitor and accompany 100% of the time. No, I'm not a trusting person. I don't get sued, either.

But the question is how do they get away with it? Is it again one of those $2000 settlements? Or does a court of law actually recognize and validate this practice?

Chuckit · Jul 29, 2007, 10:15 AM

Originally Posted by macintologist

But the question is how do they get away with it? Is it again one of those $2000 settlements? Or does a court of law actually recognize and validate this practice?

Most of the frivolous-lawsuit industry is centered around settlements. Probably not $2,000, but still lower than the cost of fighting and potentially losing.

The Godfather · Jul 29, 2007, 11:12 AM

But can't the defendant countersue for the money and time wasted if the original lawsuit is proved frivolous?