In a world of Litigants and Frivolous Pursuits
In an era of lawsuits and massive litigations here we’ll have an exploration of some of the more prominent suits from years past. There are quite somethings intriguing about the manner in which some individuals seek to file claims against major companies. At times consumers can be quite frivolous in their claims and herein we will explore just a few of the major cases that have transpired over the years. Big businesses due to their notoriety have fallen subject on multiple occasions to the claims of many consumers and in reading the case information you can determine for yourselves the true nature of their intent.
KELLOGS VS EXXON
Now if you know anything about the major brands, you would have already been aware of what used to be their similarity in advertising images. Their mascots, a tiger, were the cause of contention as Kellog Co. had for many years been identified by Tony the Tiger. At the time, the claim was brought forth, it was posited that Kellog Co. felt as though their trademark had begun to be encroached on. As such they sought remedy for relief. Initially it was stated that they ought to have sought remedy years ago in the 1970’s when they were both actively visible. But it was later settled that Exxon Mobil did in fact encroach due to their similarity in visuals despite not being used for the same mean. The parties later settled the matter following the judgement made.
LIEBECK VS MCDONALD’S
This case has now been regarded as the benchmark for individuals’ pursuit against major corporations for injuries sustained resulting in harm or loss suffered and they seek reform in tort law. Liebeck purchased a cup of coffee which she spilled on herself resulting in burns. She in fact came out victorious.
NORMAN VS HONDA
In this case the family of Karen Norman sued the massive company for their daughter who died after not being able to hit the emergency release button on the seat belt. Though she had a blood alcohol level of 0.17 they were awarded 25% of the damages considered contributory negligence
AITKEN VS NBC
Mr. Aitken alleged that it was due to the graphic nature of the Fear Factor show that he had an immediate rise in his blood pressure which resulted in his walking into a wall. The case was found to be so frivolous that it was thrown out.
FRIEDERIKE WALLENTIN-HERMANN VS ALITALIA
Airline companies have now had to think twice about pay-out actions or lack thereof due to this case. This case has spearheaded the notion that airlines have to be more considerate of their customers as when it is that they have delays due to mechanical issues they ought to be made aware.
Over the years there have been many claims made against major companies. Some have been successful in their claims while others have been deemed to be frivolous and thrown out.