Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 62
  1. #41  
    Originally posted by Toby
    [B]Yes, and you've still yet to convince me that in the real world the two aren't the same. They're only different within the 'legal' world.
    I think what I am trying to say is that by definition these things can only occur in the "legal" world. If you are sued or charged with a crime, that only comes about because of (and in the "legal world".) the fact that you, Toby G., are outside of the legal evaluating something that happened inside the legal world doesn't make you "the real world."

    I think that comes on MTv or something.

    P.S. There's no fooling oneself into thinking anything when one's insurance company has the absolute right to settle--the insured's thoughts, real world or legal world, don't matter.

    P.P.S. What did you get sued for?
  2. #42  
    Originally posted by thorin
    ayayaygg!!! laywer fight! *takes cover*
    thorin-
    you can't think Toby's a lawyer....he keeps saying the legal world isn't the same thing as the real world!!!
  3. #43  
    Originally posted by thorin
    what you're missing is that the prixe winniner need not necessarily sell enough beer to cover the cost of the car-- the fact that hundreds of waitresses are all trying to sell a much beer as possible in order to win is what pays for it.
    'Hundreds' of waitresses? Either Hooters has a LOT of staff at each shop, or this contest was being spread over several different shops!

    Regardless, 90% of the time, management runs these promotions to increase profits, with the remainder being to boost morale. Morale boosting contests usually involve things besides selling a specific product, so it was probably a sales promotion.

    No one runs a sales promotion, then gives away the profits in a big ticket item. Sure- it could have been a used car, an older model, a low-end model, or other less expensive variation, and/or it could have been some sort of tax write-off or other 'gimmick' for the owner- but there is still a strong desire on the part of management to use the profit for other purposes than a prize.
    Do what you can, with what you have, where you are at!
  4. #44  
    Originally posted by Madkins007


    'Hundreds' of waitresses? Either Hooters has a LOT of staff at each shop, or this contest was being spread over several different shops
    agian, i blame the massive dearth of details. the article doesnt expressly say if the contest was run by hooters the company, a single franchised hooters, or a bunch of franchised hooters owend by a single person/company.
    -thorin

    I have a webcomic. You should read it, or I may do something rash. <b><a href=http://driveby.keenspace.com/>Drive-by Loitering</a></b> is updated every monday, wednesday and friday.

    <!img src=http://www.frontfly.com/myrouter/vcsig2.gif alt="Soundsgood is too elite for the punks."><img src=http://www.frontfly.com/vcsig.gif ><!img src=http://www.frontfly.com/myrouter/vcsig2.gif alt="Soundsgood is too elite for the punks.">
  5. #45  
    Originally posted by K. Cannon
    I think what I am trying to say is that by definition these things can only occur in the "legal" world.
    But with real world implications.
    If you are sued or charged with a crime, that only comes about because of (and in the "legal world".)
    And what I'm saying is that the definitions and results that happen within that legal world are not necessarily in any relation to reality.
    the fact that you, Toby G., are outside of the legal evaluating something that happened inside the legal world doesn't make you "the real world."
    I didn't say that I was the 'real world'. I said that I was looking at it from a 'real world' perspective and not letting other fictitious 'legal' issues cloud it. If one person takes something from another person without asking permission, they have stolen something, regardless of whether or not they are ever prosecuted for petty theft, grand theft, etc. Just because someone hasn't been accused of a 'crime' in the 'legal world' doesn't mean they haven't committed one. And just because someone doesn't admit liability in the 'legal world' doesn't mean that they (or their representatives) didn't admit some degree of liability in the 'real world'.
    I think that comes on MTv or something.
    That's not the perspective I'm looking at this from either. I don't think I'm in any of their targetted audiences.
    P.S. There's no fooling oneself into thinking anything when one's insurance company has the absolute right to settle--the insured's thoughts, real world or legal world, don't matter.
    Which is why people come up with things like "I didn't admit any fault. The insurance company just paid him off because it was cheaper to settle."
    P.P.S. What did you get sued for?
    Minor little fender bender (less than 5mph, no damage to my car, scuff on his back bumper from the rubber on mine).
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  6. #46  
    Originally posted by K. Cannon
    you can't think Toby's a lawyer....he keeps saying the legal world isn't the same thing as the real world!!!
    That's correct. If I were a lawyer, I would be saying that the 'real world' doesn't exist. I would be arguing that unless one is arrested and convicted of a 'crime', that it never happened. Actually, that attitude is why I never went into law (which was my original career path long ago). I know/knew and spoke with entirely too many lawyers in the course of researching the career and found that I just couldn't disconnect myself with reality at that level. The closest I ever came to the profession was a job offer that I turned down at the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals as a database (FoxPro) programmer.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  7. #47  
    Originally posted by Toby
    that attitude is why I never went into law (which was my original career path long ago).
    That explains a lot.
    The light at the end of your tunnel has been disconnected due to non-payment. Please remit funds immediately for restoration of hope.
  8. #48  
    Originally posted by Yorick
    That explains a lot.
    LOL! Actually, I had the predilection for logic and arguing before that (read too much about Socrates et al as a child maybe). That was why law was suggested by lots of people.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  9. #49  
    Originally posted by Toby
    Minor little fender bender (less than 5mph, no damage to my car, scuff on his back bumper from the rubber on mine).
    Were you at fault?
  10. #50  
    Originally posted by K. Cannon
    Were you at fault?
    Legally, the person in the back is always 'at fault'.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  11. #51  
    Wow! I'm impressed! 4 pages of posts over one very short article!

    Gads, I wonder what we wold have done over something that actually AFFECTED us!?!?!
    Do what you can, with what you have, where you are at!
  12. #52  
    Originally posted by Madkins007
    Wow! I'm impressed! 4 pages of posts over one very short article!

    Gads, I wonder what we wold have done over something that actually AFFECTED us!?!?!
    Do you want me to start an article on the pro and cons of pushing the envelope of saving preemies and what implications that could have on the abortion industry?
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  13. #53  
    Originally posted by Toby
    Legally, the person in the back is always 'at fault'.
    You might think so, but I've actually seen civil juries award the other way. Yep, juries, God bless 'em.
  14. #54  
    Originally posted by Madkins007
    Wow! I'm impressed! 4 pages of posts over one very short article!
    Well, no one has ever accused me of being short-winded!!

    Gads, I wonder what we wold have done over something that actually AFFECTED us!?!?!
    Since I am a civil defense attorney, the general public's (...okay, Toby's...) opinion of settling does somewhat affect me.
  15. #55  
    Originally posted by K. Cannon
    You might think so, but I've actually seen civil juries award the other way. Yep, juries, God bless 'em.
    Actually, I don't think what I think matters either way. I'm just speaking of the way that it's treated in the courts here. Granted, we're also dealing with a pretty substantially different foundation here than the other 49 in some ways.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  16. #56  
    Originally posted by K. Cannon
    [...] Since I am a civil defense attorney, the general public's (...okay, Toby's...) opinion of settling does somewhat affect me.
    Why?
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  17. #57  
    Originally posted by Toby
    I'm just speaking of the way that it's treated in the courts here.
    Oh, I agree that "if you hit someone in the back, you are at fault" is the generally understood notion. But, since anybody can sue anybody else for anything (if they have the filing fee and sometimes that can be waived), and since juries interpret civil jury charges very interestingly, I've seen it happen.

    Are you saying that Louisiana courts would summarily dismiss a civil case where the "rear-ender" sues the "rear-endee"?

    Granted, we're also dealing with a pretty substantially different foundation here than the other 49 in some ways.
    Yep, but I learned in law school that SC has more than it's share of weirdo law, too. (As opposed to weirdos, which we have as well...)
  18. #58  
    Originally posted by Toby
    Why?
    Well, not necessarily directly. but I am, in general, interested in what the public's perception of a settling defendant is or may be. And I'm always interested in your opinion, Toby!!

    Or, did you mean why am I a civil defense attorney??
  19. #59  
    Originally posted by K. Cannon
    Oh, I agree that "if you hit someone in the back, you are at fault" is the generally understood notion.
    Even among law enforcement here.
    But, since anybody can sue anybody else for anything (if they have the filing fee and sometimes that can be waived), and since juries interpret civil jury charges very interestingly, I've seen it happen.
    *shrug* It's really academic in the aforementioned case.
    Are you saying that Louisiana courts would summarily dismiss a civil case where the "rear-ender" sues the "rear-endee"?
    No, but it would be an uphill battle all the way other than in the most odd of circumstances.
    Yep, but I learned in law school that SC has more than it's share of weirdo law, too.
    heh...that reminds me of an SNL skit from the time of the Clinton impeachment hearings where they were parodying a Hardball discussion of an old law from the Articles of Confederation days which allowed Congress to take the President to a remote island and hunt him for sport.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  20. #60  
    Originally posted by Toby
    Even among law enforcement here.
    Right. Who to ticket with a criminal charge in a wreck case doesn't equal who to sue for the wreck.

    heh...that reminds me of an SNL skit from the time of the Clinton impeachment hearings where they were parodying a Hardball discussion of an old law from the Articles of Confederation days which allowed Congress to take the President to a remote island and hunt him for sport.
    One of my favorite quotes (vaguely relevant):
    "South Carolina is too small to be a republic, and too large to be an insane asylum." (Allegedly said by S.C. unionist James Petigru)
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions