- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
People finally get punished for a frivolous lawsuit
Posted on 8/31/16 at 9:14 pm
Posted on 8/31/16 at 9:14 pm
11
Posted on 8/31/16 at 9:17 pm to cubsfan5150
How hard is your dick right now?
Posted on 8/31/16 at 9:17 pm to boosiebadazz
Posted on 8/31/16 at 9:17 pm to cubsfan5150
Good luck collecting on that.
Posted on 8/31/16 at 9:23 pm to cubsfan5150
Maybe they should have taken the settlement?
Posted on 8/31/16 at 9:30 pm to BruslyTiger
quote:
Maybe they should have taken the settlement
Maybe they shouldn't have file a lawsuit in the first place - movie theaters don't kill people, crazy lunatics kill people in movie theaters...
Posted on 8/31/16 at 9:30 pm to cubsfan5150
Was this a jury trial? If so 
Posted on 8/31/16 at 9:31 pm to cubsfan5150
Frivolous? I'm not sure you understand what that word means
Posted on 9/1/16 at 5:57 am to Barrister
I'll stick to the my wording... and those people got what they deserved.
Posted on 9/1/16 at 6:47 am to Barrister
Judges have used that word in other cases where the complaintant party was claiming some farfetched attribution of negligence similar to what this case was about.
Posted on 9/1/16 at 6:56 am to Clames
Negligent security isn't some farfetched theory of liability. It made it past summary judgment and got to a jury. Jury trials are a crapshoot. Also, I wouldn't call losing a jury trial on catastrophic damages claims, when the defendant was offering decent money, would make a case "frivolous". They made a calculated risk and lost.
Cinemark piling on to the paralyzed victim of a shooting on their property seems a bit much from a PR standpoint, but it's their right to collect fees.
Cinemark piling on to the paralyzed victim of a shooting on their property seems a bit much from a PR standpoint, but it's their right to collect fees.
Posted on 9/1/16 at 7:02 am to cubsfan5150
This has been posted a while back, but it's a dumb move on their part. Write the legal fees off and move on. 700k is definitely not worth the bad publicity.
Posted on 9/1/16 at 7:14 am to AUbagman
quote:
700k is definitely not worth the bad publicity.
They fought back against the growing notion in this country that businesses are somehow liable for every bad thing in the world and when something goes wrong, no matter how far beyond their control it is, they should be made to pay.
And they won.
Bad publicity? They just earned my business.
I'm sure there are more like me.
I'm also sure there are many who will not darken their doors because of this.
But maybe they'll think twice before suing someone so swiftly when something goes wrong in the future.
Posted on 9/1/16 at 7:15 am to tigerpimpbot
quote:
Negligent security isn't some farfetched theory of liability. It made it past summary judgment and got to a jury.
I am going to call bullshite on this. If you are going to argue that every business bears a duty to keep you secure against any threat, regardless of how foreseeable, then we can just shut down every public venue. Because I don't want to pay $40 a movie ticket so they can have metal detectors and armed guards at the theater. What happened was terrible but it was the actions of the shooter and not Cinemark that hurt the victims.
As far as the fees go, they are sending a message. The message is, sue us and you better have a case or else we are coming after you. I would do the same thing.
Posted on 9/1/16 at 7:31 am to jbgleason
quote:
regardless of how foreseeable,
Nob reasonable person would make the argument that there is no foreseeability issue. That's actually usually exactly the issue for the jury has to sort out. Again, it's not some farfetched cause of action.
If a business has 10 of its patrons robbed 10 times in their exclusively controlled parking lot in the span of say 60 days, and that business fails to take any security measures, when the 11th person gets shot and killed in their parking lot, you think it's "frivolous" to hold that business accountable for failing to make any reasonable security measures?
Posted on 9/1/16 at 7:44 am to cubsfan5150
How could this be a frivolous suit? I'm not an attorney, but I have read that certain industries (hotels and public transportation) are held to a much higher regard in terms of liability.
Could the movie theatre potentially have done something different to thwart this heinous attack? I know nothing about the suit, but for example:
-Movie theatre policy to staff 4 security guards around the cinema and on the day of the shooting, they only had 1 security guard scheduled to work.
-Movie theatre is supposed to monitor security cameras in and around the theatre during all working hours. The day of the incident, the security cameras were inoperable.
-Movie theatre was supposed to routinely check and keep secure all outdoor/fire exits and make sure they are shut. The day of the incident, the POS shooter came in through the back, fire door exit.
Could the movie theatre potentially have done something different to thwart this heinous attack? I know nothing about the suit, but for example:
-Movie theatre policy to staff 4 security guards around the cinema and on the day of the shooting, they only had 1 security guard scheduled to work.
-Movie theatre is supposed to monitor security cameras in and around the theatre during all working hours. The day of the incident, the security cameras were inoperable.
-Movie theatre was supposed to routinely check and keep secure all outdoor/fire exits and make sure they are shut. The day of the incident, the POS shooter came in through the back, fire door exit.
Posted on 9/1/16 at 7:45 am to RDOtiger
quote:
movie theaters don't kill people, crazy lunatics kill people in movie theaters
And only get life plus thirty years.
How the hell does this guy kill 12 people and shoot 70 more and only get a life sentence?!? Our legal system is so fcked up!
Posted on 9/1/16 at 7:46 am to reveille
quote:
How the hell does this guy kill 12 people and shoot 70 more and only get a life sentence
ETA: On August 24 he was sentenced to 12 consecutive life sentences plus 3,318 years without parole
This post was edited on 9/1/16 at 7:48 am
Posted on 9/1/16 at 7:54 am to cubsfan5150
Didn't they have a settlement offer? The plaintiffs clearly should have taken that.
Posted on 9/1/16 at 7:58 am to reveille
quote:
And only get life plus thirty years.
How the hell does this guy kill 12 people and shoot 70 more and only get a life sentence?!? Our legal system is so fcked up!
First this isn't right
Second, even if it was, is there really a point in more than 1 life sentence? Going to be hard to collect on that second, third, fourth, etc.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News