[net.legal] Silly suits

lasher@via.DEC (Lew Lasher - DTN 381-2651) (07/26/85)

	"A man filed suit against a tavern for negligently serving him
	excessive amounts of alcohol, leading to his arrest and humiliation
	after he stabbed another man during an argument.

	"Is there any justification for this sort of thing?"

	"Yes there is.  Anyone can sue anyone for any reason.  The way one
	discovers whether the reason is on or off the wall is in the trial."

It is not true that "anyone can sue anyone for any reason" and go to trial.
If a suit is filed on a basis that is truly "off the wall", a judge can,
upon a motion filed by the defendant, dismiss the suit.  Although civil
litigants generally have a right to a jury trial, a judge can terminate
the lawsuit if there is no possible basis in law to justify an award for
the plaintiff even if a jury were to find all the facts in the plaintiff's
favor.

Lew Lasher

gadfly@ihu1m.UUCP (Gadfly) (07/30/85)

--
> "A man filed suit against a tavern for negligently serving him
> excessive amounts of alcohol, leading to his arrest and humiliation
> after he stabbed another man during an argument.
>
> "Is there any justification for this sort of thing?"
> 
> "Yes there is.  Anyone can sue anyone for any reason.  The way one
> discovers whether the reason is on or off the wall is in the trial."

Not quite.  As I understand it, one must have "status to sue",
which entails showing material damages.  You must be substantially
wronged.  I have this understanding because once upon a time I
worked on an underground paper which was infiltrated by the city's
"red squad".  We didn't know it at the time, but it came out
when some of these records were made public under a more enlightened
administration.  We went to the ACLU screaming violation of our
4th Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure, but
were told that unless we could show--5 years after the fact--that
the stoolie caused some real damage, we had nothing to sue for.
-- 
                    *** ***
JE MAINTIENDRAI   ***** *****
                 ****** ******  30 Jul 85 [12 Thermidor An CXCIII]
ken perlow       *****   *****
(312)979-7753     ** ** ** **
..ihnp4!iwsl8!ken   *** ***

levy@ttrdc.UUCP (Daniel R. Levy) (08/01/85)

gadfly@ihu1m.UUCP (Gadfly)  <577@ihu1m.UUCP>:
>
>--
>> "A man filed suit against a tavern for negligently serving him
>> excessive amounts of alcohol, leading to his arrest and humiliation
>> after he stabbed another man during an argument.
>>
>> "Is there any justification for this sort of thing?"
>> 
>> "Yes there is.  Anyone can sue anyone for any reason.  The way one
>> discovers whether the reason is on or off the wall is in the trial."
>
>Not quite.  As I understand it, one must have "status to sue",
>which entails showing material damages.  You must be substantially
>wronged.  I have this understanding because once upon a time I
>worked on an underground paper which was infiltrated by the city's
>"red squad".  We didn't know it at the time, but it came out
>when some of these records were made public under a more enlightened
>administration.  We went to the ACLU screaming violation of our
>4th Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure, but
>were told that unless we could show--5 years after the fact--that
>the stoolie caused some real damage, we had nothing to sue for.
>
My impression is that what the ACLU meant was not that it was impossible to
file a suit (which is what the original author is talking about) but just
that it was unwinnable.  It would have still been possible to file a
lawsuit, but right or wrong the ACLU didn't want to waste time on something
it believed to be unwinnable.  The claim could have been mental anguish or
something on that order.

(Imagine if it were possible to sue government bodies right and left for vio-
lations of privacy, etc.  Talk about court clog city.  Sadly, that is probably
the only reason that entertaining such suits would be unreasonable, given the
way some gov't agencies behave.)
-- 
 -------------------------------    Disclaimer:  The views contained herein are
|       dan levy | yvel nad      |  my own and are not at all those of my em-
|         an engihacker @        |  ployer, my pets, my plants, my boss, or the
| at&t computer systems division |  s.a. of any computer upon which I may hack.
|        skokie, illinois        |
|          "go for it"           |  Path: ..!ihnp4!ttrdc!levy
 --------------------------------     or: ..!ihnp4!iheds!ttbcad!levy