• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

SouthWest Air Sued

I didn't know what vauge provided, which means that this was not a bogus law suit. There are some law suits that are frivolous and at that point they can be AWARDED, key word, AWARDED, key worded there, legal fees. That is because you can't just declare that all types of lawsuits are frivolous, thus a judge or jury has to determine that awarding them is justified.
 
ShamMol said:
I didn't know what vauge provided, which means that this was not a bogus law suit. There are some law suits that are frivolous and at that point they can be AWARDED, key word, AWARDED, key worded there, legal fees. That is because you can't just declare that all types of lawsuits are frivolous, thus a judge or jury has to determine that awarding them is justified.

So a flight attendant saying "enny menny minny moe" is not a frivolous lawsuit?
 
Calm2Chaos said:
So a flight attendant saying "enny menny minny moe" is not a frivolous lawsuit?
As I said, there was a small amount of merit to keep it in the courts. Seriously, did you read waht vauge posted-that validates what was filed in the briefs with the court that it at least had some merit. the jury didn't find in favor and didn't award lawyers fees and the system works.
 
Companies should to take into account what is OK to be said to a diverse population. However, in today's day and age, it is difficult to say anything without steping on some peoples toes. :doh Maybe we should work towards educating the public on what people find offensive whether it be sexual preference, racial, or religious.:twocents:

...then there are always those people looking to be offended, I don't think we can do much about them :)
 
Jonathan Hope said:
Companies should to take into account what is OK to be said to a diverse population. However, in today's day and age, it is difficult to say anything without steping on some peoples toes. :doh Maybe we should work towards educating the public on what people find offensive whether it be sexual preference, racial, or religious.:twocents:

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

at any point in time do you ever get tired of trying to be completely PC. How about you grow a set of balls and realize that I don't care what you say. I don't care what you think about me. If to speak to you I need to make sure everythign I have to say is unoffensive in every way to every creed, religion, age, and sex. Then I don't want to talk to you anyway. Get over it, get over yourself. Friggin PC police are killing everything within this country
 
ShamMol said:
As I said, there was a small amount of merit to keep it in the courts. Seriously, did you read waht vauge posted-that validates what was filed in the briefs with the court that it at least had some merit. the jury didn't find in favor and didn't award lawyers fees and the system works.

"Eenie, meenie, minie, mo...take your seat, it's time to go."

^^^^^^^
I am sorry but that is crap and a frivolous lawsuit for someone trying to make a quick dollar. Make them pay all legal expenses. Get the hel over yourself. It is not offensive in any way. And I highly doubt the woman meant it to be offensive in anyway. If she did however mean for that little sentence to be offensive then discipline her or fire her. But don't entertain this stupid as s lawsuit from someone lookig to cash in and make a quick payday. HORSECRAP
 
I understand your feelings, there are those times when PC gets on my nerves, and then I think is PC PC? it can be dizzying.
 
Did you read what vauge posted about the word mo? I won't get the "hell over myself." I told you the straight up facts of what likely happened in the case, but I will go through them again. The judge found some bit of merit in the claim, otherwise he would have thrown it out. The parties go through all the pretrial and discovery and we get to trial. They select a jury and the trial ensues. The trial is over and the jury does not find for the women but does not choose to award damages because they felt that there was some merit to bring the case even though there was not enough to decide in their favor. In most jury instructions, they are given instructions that they can award damages to the defense, including jury fees and legal fees. This jury did not do that and judge did not see fit, like most judges do, to overturn that decision by the jury. That is likely exactly what happened, so forgive me for not getting over myself and my analysis of the situation.

The system is set up this way and you should get over you indignation and see that it legal fees are awarded when warranted, and obviously it wasn't in this situation. You also have to see that from the outside looking in, we don't have access to discovery and the such so we don't know what evidence there was about the subsequent flight, the behavior by that one flight attendant, etc. Listen, it is great to have convictions, but just say you are right and then never stop to think, hey, there might be a point here that I can take away. The point is this-don't be so quick to say it was frivolous when you didn't see all the evidence (which only the jury and judge did) and when you were not present for the preceedings.

You obviously think that all lawyers are ambulance chasers trying to make a quick buck, and I won't try and change your mind but only add that there are good people out there too. Someone earlier said that this lawyer did it completely pro-bono meaning he did it just because he wanted to help the women who couldn't afford the legal fees. There are those out there who are like you think they are, but there are good ones like my boss who only take cases that aren't frivolous, that aren't a waste of time, that serve a legitmate purpose.
 
ShamMol said:
You would be surprised at what people take offense at in this world. It could easily be that it was used way back when by slave owners, or by some white supremicist in a speech or in a childhood memory, etc.


So that means you should sue because someone says something that is totaly unrelated to something that you personally never experienced in the forst place? I don't know about your memories and I don't care about your memories. And there is no way you should be able to sue because something I said in gest triggered a bad memory. They should be forced to pay all SW legal fee's and and other costs inccurred in dealing with this frivoluos, meritless, moneygrab of a lawsuit

ShamMol said:
What we take offense at and what others do is completley different and we must always be careful not to say something that is offensive to someone, because guess what that results in, yup, a lawsuit filed by people like my boss.


Screw em. You have tried and succesfully made this into a PC world. Tough shi t get over it. If a person is incapable of hearing something because they might find it offensive then their whole life is ruined. You need to be put to sleep to make everyone else's life better. I will not worry about everyword that comes out of my mouth. If you find it offensive tough sh it. If I mean to be offensive thats one thing. But if you find pain in something minor thats your problem not mine.


ShamMol said:
Vandree, if the jury did not award damages to the defense in way of lawyers fees, then there really isn't anything they can do. There must have been enough evidence for it to go to trial though...actually, that would be interesting to look into, where did you get that info, I would like to take a peek.

Frivolus lawsuit right from the begining. I think the lawclerk that filed the papers should have the ability to place them in the shredder. Tell them thet they refuse to process this whiney ass money grab. And that if you want money get a job and stop trying to rip people off and waste there time with these BS lawsuits
 
Calm2Chaos said:
So that means you should sue because someone says something that is totaly unrelated to something that you personally never experienced in the forst place? I don't know about your memories and I don't care about your memories. And there is no way you should be able to sue because something I said in gest triggered a bad memory. They should be forced to pay all SW legal fee's and and other costs inccurred in dealing with this frivoluos, meritless, moneygrab of a lawsuit
Alright, I have explained the process to you, explained how it works in the real world and explained that this case likely had enough merit not to award fees due to the fact it went to trial, and you still don't listen, so I am done. Keep ranting. I was calm, logical, and explained the process, but you didn't listen...in your own words, screw em.
Screw em. You have tried and succesfully made this into a PC world. Tough shi t get over it. If a person is incapable of hearing something because they might find it offensive then their whole life is ruined. You need to be put to sleep to make everyone else's life better. I will not worry about everyword that comes out of my mouth. If you find it offensive tough sh it. If I mean to be offensive thats one thing. But if you find pain in something minor thats your problem not mine.
It is your problem because you will be sued. Welcome to America, welcome to capitalism, welcome to the modern world. You seem to be living back..you know what, never mind, you aren't worth my time expalining it, becauase I have done that and I am done.
Frivolus lawsuit right from the begining. I think the lawclerk that filed the papers should have the ability to place them in the shredder. Tell them thet they refuse to process this whiney ass money grab. And that if you want money get a job and stop trying to rip people off and waste there time with these BS lawsuits
They have jobs from what the papers said. A law clerk would not be filing the papers, that would be the job of a lowly person, not someone who is assigned to work with a judge writing opinions. :2wave:
 
ShamMol said:
Alright, I have explained the process to you, explained how it works in the real world and explained that this case likely had enough merit not to award fees due to the fact it went to trial, and you still don't listen, so I am done. Keep ranting. I was calm, logical, and explained the process, but you didn't listen...in your own words, screw em.
It is your problem because you will be sued. Welcome to America, welcome to capitalism, welcome to the modern world. You seem to be living back..you know what, never mind, you aren't worth my time expalining it, becauase I have done that and I am done.
They have jobs from what the papers said. A law clerk would not be filing the papers, that would be the job of a lowly person, not someone who is assigned to work with a judge writing opinions. :2wave:

Just because it goes through the process you figiure it has merit? Opinions differ mine is it was a BS moneygrab of a lawsuit. And you are of the mind that it was a true lawsuit. That a rhymn<sp> hurt someones feelings so bad that they thought you owed them money for it. Because it goes through the process does not make it have merit. It makes it a waste of time. And if you can't understand that i am not going to explain it again.

I am probably one of the least PC people out there. I haven't gotten sued yet. But If I do thats ok too. I have a lawyer and I have the time. You say welcome to America, But it's people with your mentality that are making the problems that we have. Lets not discourage the wrong action. Lets make sure there are no penalties for acting like a leech from the system. You explain to me how the enny meeny rhymn was a merited lawsuit. It was a frigging string of like words. And you figure it had to have merit because it went through the process? I am sorry your wrong and hopefully thats not your real criteria for merit.

Well maybe the lowly person could do it then.... Didn't know a law clerk was so high on the law totem pole. But whomever it is should have laughed at them and filed underc "C" for Crap Lawsuit
 
Calm2Chaos said:
Just because it goes through the process you figiure it has merit? Opinions differ mine is it was a BS moneygrab of a lawsuit. And you are of the mind that it was a true lawsuit. That a rhymn<sp> hurt someones feelings so bad that they thought you owed them money for it. Because it goes through the process does not make it have merit. It makes it a waste of time. And if you can't understand that i am not going to explain it again.

I am probably one of the least PC people out there. I am sorry your wrong and hopefully thats not your real criteria for merit.

Well maybe the lowly person could do it then.... Didn't know a law clerk was so high on the law totem pole. But whomever it is should have laughed at them and filed underc "C" for Crap Lawsuit
Just going to pick out three things here. One-if it has any merit-they are not going to get their money back, so you are wrong. Stop making that claim because you really don't know what you are talking about, you are just assuming. Yes, law clerks are quite high up and the bread and butter imo of the legal system...some judges don't even write their own opinions anymore which is sad. And three....welcome to america to borrow your catchphrase where you will be sued for racist comments. This was theoretically, I didn't say definetly, I said theoretically, a racist comment. Why? Because way back when a mo was a black person. That could have seriously offended a black person who knew what it meant. I actually just read an interview with milton bradley, baseball player for the dodgers-my favorite one, and he said that he valued race over his job and over the game itself. That is how important it is to some people and until you understand that, you won't understand how deeply it can hurt them.

But the rant is done and it is time for you to now tell me that I am insane and too PC for America and what is wrong with america and all that mumbo jumbo.
 
ShamMol said:
Just going to pick out three things here. One-if it has any merit-they are not going to get their money back, so you are wrong. Stop making that claim because you really don't know what you are talking about, you are just assuming. Yes, law clerks are quite high up and the bread and butter imo of the legal system...some judges don't even write their own opinions anymore which is sad. And three....welcome to america to borrow your catchphrase where you will be sued for racist comments. This was theoretically, I didn't say definetly, I said theoretically, a racist comment. Why? Because way back when a mo was a black person. That could have seriously offended a black person who knew what it meant. I actually just read an interview with milton bradley, baseball player for the dodgers-my favorite one, and he said that he valued race over his job and over the game itself. That is how important it is to some people and until you understand that, you won't understand how deeply it can hurt them.

But the rant is done and it is time for you to now tell me that I am insane and too PC for America and what is wrong with america and all that mumbo jumbo.

But it had no merit. it was a money grab. At least it was in my opinion. They weren't slaves in this country or any other is my bet. If want to run around screaming racial slurs all day I have that right. I will not be sued because I have nothing to sue for. And I am entitled to freedom of speech. However they found someone or thing that does have money and they tried it. Thankfully it failed. Why sue? If it was truly an incident that touched them so deeply why not ask for disciplinary action against the stewerdass. Why is it the only way your rage was going to be soothed was by getting payed????? Sorry but I think these people are the equavalant of those that run on a bus after an accident so they can sue the bus company

Didn't mean to offend the law clerk population out there, forgive me.

I don't own any slaves so I will never know how it felt. And to the best of my knowledge there are no living slaves so they will never know how it felt. Live in the day and stop trying to get over on people

I don't think your insane. Actually You may be insane. I just don't care if you are or you aren't. I think you are worried about what others think. I personaly am not as much. People need to learn to move on a little bit and stop dwelling on **** for the sake of giving them an excuse. So I really don't have any mumbo jumbo, or at least not much anyway
 
There weren't any slaves in this country or any other?! O...M...G. You poor soul, read up on your history. It is your right to go around saying that stuff, but when you represent a company, it is their right to go ahead and sue for emotional damages. In your opinion it had no merit, in my opinion it had some, in their opinion it had all the merit in the word. Everything is how you look at it.

But I will restate my assertion earlier that we were not in the courtroom and we didn't see the evidence presented so we really don't know what happened on that airplane in its totality. Do we? No we don't.

What do you think of Milton Bradley, I would be interested to know waht you think...it is interesting to me at the very least...and I will even post part of the article here.
dodgers.mlb.com said:
"Me being an African-American is the most important thing to me, even more important than baseball. There's always race. White people never want to see race in anything. But there's race involved in baseball. That's why there's less than 9 percent African-American representation in the game. I'm one of the few African-Americans that starts here."

Dodgers.com
 
ShamMol said:
There weren't any slaves in this country or any other?! O...M...G. You poor soul, read up on your history. It is your right to go around saying that stuff, but when you represent a company, it is their right to go ahead and sue for emotional damages. In your opinion it had no merit, in my opinion it had some, in their opinion it had all the merit in the word. Everything is how you look at it.

But I will restate my assertion earlier that we were not in the courtroom and we didn't see the evidence presented so we really don't know what happened on that airplane in its totality. Do we? No we don't.

What do you think of Milton Bradley, I would be interested to know waht you think...it is interesting to me at the very least...and I will even post part of the article here.

WTF are you talking about? I never said there were no slaves in this country or any other. I said I never owned a slave so I wouldn't know what t was like. Gezzzz read a little slower next time. If the woman knowingly insulted someone with racial slurs then MAYBE you can make a case. But by the sound of it she made a statement and they attached saw a different meaning then was at all intended. They saw the bus crash, jumped on, held there neck and called a lawyer. But before you speak you better know the definition of everyword that comes from your mouth. You better know every variable and you better know the different arcane definitions from various eras. It so absurd it makes me laff. Indians can't win a lawsuit against the NFL. But some old slur which very few people actually remember or know the definition of is enuf "Emotion damage" to require payment. The only emotional damage to these two never been slaves, was that they got so happy they were going to get paid for nothing.

Honestly it was a word, a single world. Unless the woman walked in with a billboard of a slave screamed MO MO MO and then hit them over the heads with it. I think it was frivolous suit.

I went through the article, can't say I read the whole thing but I did go through it. First of I think there all prima dona babies black, white, brown or yellow. They play a game and make millions so I have a hard time taking anything they say seriously. I am boggled that I have to know how to talk to a multi millionare black athlete. I will talk to you the same way I talk to everybody else on the team. I will not treat you special because your black. Your a grown man that makes a lot of money playing a game a few months a year. Why must people talk to you different then anybody else. Why is being black and excuse for the problem? If I don't know how to talk to a black athlete the problem is with the athlete then. I shouldn't have to talk to him any different he isn't different or special because he is a black athlete
 
You keep saying it was a single word but we don't know the proceedings and what came out as evidence. There might havve been other things on the flight, we just don't know. That is the point I tried to get across to you on several occassions and so far it hasn't stuck.

I will read more carefully next time the words.

You think, I think, She thinks-It all matters what the jury thinks and the jury thought that the case didn't have enough merit to be decided for the plaintiffs. It had enough to go to trial because it survived pretrial. The jury, not you, decides what happens, so deal with it. If they don't award jury and legal fees, then tough, get over it.

I actually tenatively agree with you, but I was looking to your reaction about what he felt about race. How felt it was more important than baseball. See, this is one thing that I feel that many white people don't understand about minorities-that race is supremely important in almost everything. It isn't to us, but to them it is. That is what I was looking to see if you disagreed with...but I guess you will.

I agree we shouldn't theoretically have to talk differently with anyone, but I also think there are certain words taht should never be said in polite society for fear of upsetting someone...whether it be b****r or n****r or something like that. I don't think it is right to say those and thus we never should. Jeff apparently did-he shouldn't have.
 
Words have only the power you give them. If they are not accompanied by actions that make someone feel discriminated against, what is the big deal? They are just words.
 
vandree said:
Words have only the power you give them. If they are not accompanied by actions that make someone feel discriminated against, what is the big deal? They are just words.
To these people those words held a lot of power.
 
"Protected class"?!?!?! Only non-caucasians would pull this crap.....Let me guess, negros teaming up with money hungry jew lawyers.....
 
ShamMol said:
You keep saying it was a single word but we don't know the proceedings and what came out as evidence. There might havve been other things on the flight, we just don't know. That is the point I tried to get across to you on several occassions and so far it hasn't stuck.

I will read more carefully next time the words.

You think, I think, She thinks-It all matters what the jury thinks and the jury thought that the case didn't have enough merit to be decided for the plaintiffs. It had enough to go to trial because it survived pretrial. The jury, not you, decides what happens, so deal with it. If they don't award jury and legal fees, then tough, get over it.

I actually tenatively agree with you, but I was looking to your reaction about what he felt about race. How felt it was more important than baseball. See, this is one thing that I feel that many white people don't understand about minorities-that race is supremely important in almost everything. It isn't to us, but to them it is. That is what I was looking to see if you disagreed with...but I guess you will.

I agree we shouldn't theoretically have to talk differently with anyone, but I also think there are certain words taht should never be said in polite society for fear of upsetting someone...whether it be b****r or n****r or something like that. I don't think it is right to say those and thus we never should. Jeff apparently did-he shouldn't have.

Your right I don't know. But I can only make points on the facts I do know. And from what I know about these, those are my feelings. A lot of things could have happened that they kept secret for some reason. But since they have not made those facts public I will base my decision on what I know. I know the word "mo" pissed em off and they sued for money. In my opinion it was a grab for money with the information I have. Now if new information comes to light I will be happy to reaccess my opinion on the new facts.

I agree some words shouldn't be used in public in certain situations. But I think also that if you want to eliminate a word from the general public you should first eliminate it from your vocabulary. Lead by example, society is not a do as I say not as I do type hiearchy.
 
I forget who said this, but I always liked it....

A jury....12 people who decide who has the best lawyer.
 
Calm2Chaos said:
Your right I don't know. But I can only make points on the facts I do know. And from what I know about these, those are my feelings. A lot of things could have happened that they kept secret for some reason. But since they have not made those facts public I will base my decision on what I know. I know the word "mo" pissed em off and they sued for money. In my opinion it was a grab for money with the information I have. Now if new information comes to light I will be happy to reaccess my opinion on the new facts.
Fair enough and we will leave it at that. I think we have both made our points made and we both know where each other stand quite clearly.
I agree some words shouldn't be used in public in certain situations. But I think also that if you want to eliminate a word from the general public you should first eliminate it from your vocabulary. Lead by example, society is not a do as I say not as I do type hiearchy.
I agree. But the question is how to eliminate those words completely from society, and that is where it becomes complicated. Because African Americans expect to be able to use the n word while limiting the use of the word amond white americans...to me that just isn't logical or feasible.

Hoot-if that is true, I will win every case I am ever involved in.
 
Apparently many think this lawsuit had no merit at all:

"Grace Fuller claims that she suffered two epileptic seizures because a flight attendant used the phrase "Eenie, meenie, minie, mo, pick a seat, we gotta go" to passengers boarding an open-seating flight late; Fuller and her travelling companion, both African-Americans, ascribed racist meaning to the phrase, and sued under a variety of federal and state claims. Some claims were thrown out, and a jury did what a judge should've done sooner, and bounced the rest. (Feb. 9, 2004; Jan. 22, 2004 and links therein).

The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court judgment for defendants. After a full trial, and briefing for an appeal, the cost to Southwest Airlines of "Eenie Meenie Minie Moe" was surely in the six digits. But, though the law in questions permit plaintiffs to recover attorneys' fees if they are successful (surely the only reason an attorney agreed to bring this suit), defendant Southwest Airlines is going to have to swallow the cost of this ridiculous suit. The opinion creates no precedent, so if Sawyer wants to sue someone else for using a nursery rhyme, she can do so in the future. (Sawyer v. Southwest Airlines Co., No. 04-3109 (10th Cir. Aug. 10, 2005) (hat tip to P.N.)).
"

http://www.overlawyered.com/archives/2005_08.html
 
Overlawyered...wow...that is one of the greatest sites I have ever come across...you should really chekc out this one blog called Underneath Their Robes, hillarious stuff. For example, Judge Robers is a Judicial Hottie! Aren't you happy you know that?!

IT had some merit otherwise it would have been thrown out in the beginning...it is really that simple. And just because some people don't get that doesn't mean I am going to explain that to them all day.
 
IT had some merit otherwise it would have been thrown out in the beginning....

Not really, because it is somewhat of a subjective decision. I know and you know that a different judge may have thrown out the lawsuit long before it got to trial. It also depends on how good the lawyers argued the case.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Did you read about Burger King suing the band Slipknot? I thought that was funny. Or Federal Express suing this guy who made his furniture out of Fedex boxes? (http://www.fedexfurniture.com)
 
Back
Top Bottom