JUSTICE!! - funny story

Lawyer A. Charlotte, NC, (this can only happen in America) purchased a
box of very rare and expensive cigars, then insured them against fire among
other things.

Within a month having smoked his entire stockpile of these great cigars
and without yet having made even his first premium payment on the policy,
the lawyer filed a claim against the insurance company.

In his claim, the lawyer stated the cigars were lost "in a series of
small fires."

The insurance company refused to pay, citing the obvious reason: that
the man had consumed the cigars in the normal fashion. The lawyer sued and
won!

In delivering the ruling the judge agreed with the insurance company
that the claim was frivolous. The Judge stated nevertheless, that the lawyer
held a policy from the company in which it had warranted that the cigars
were insurable and also guaranteed that it would insure them against fire,
without defining what is considered to be "unacceptable fire" and was
obligated to pay the claim.

Rather than endure a lengthy and costly appeal process, the insurance
company accepted the ruling and paid $15,000 to the lawyer for his loss
of the rare cigars, lost in the "fires".

NOW FOR THE BEST PART!

After the lawyer cashed the cheque, the insurance company had him
arrested
on 24 counts of ARSON!!!! With his own insurance claim and testimony
from
the previous case being used against him, the lawyer was convicted of
intentionally burning his insured property and was sentenced to 24
months in jail and a $24,000 fine.

This is a true story and was the 1st place winner in the recent
Criminal
Lawyers Award

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: True, it can only happen in america.

if some1 jumps off a building and then is shot dead by some1 as they are falling to their death..should that person still be charged with murder?

Yes, because the intent to kill from that person is still the same. If the shooting was premeditated, and the person was dead before he hit the ground from gunshot wounds, then that's murder.

If I shoot a terminal cancer patient that has two days left to live, should I be charged? (Don't factor euthanasia into the equation).

Louis

Quote:

if some1 jumps off a building and then is shot dead by some1 as they are falling to their death..should that person still be charged with murder?

hmmmm that's an interesting question. I would say "yes" that person would be charged with murder because A) it is not for certain that the person would have died from jumping off the building (chances are they probably would but since it is not certain you couldn't make a definite claim), and B) the shooter kills the person before they have a chance to kill themselves.

Quote:

Yes, because the intent to kill from that person is still the same. If the shooting was premeditated, and the person was dead before he hit the ground from gunshot wounds, then that's murder.

If I shoot a terminal cancer patient that has two days left to live, should I be charged? (Don't factor euthanasia into the equation).

Louis

Euthanasia was one of the topics I covered back when i was an English Prof. People tend to believe that it is murder, but those same people also say that if they were in that situation they would want their family members to end their suffering or they would want to end the suffering of someone else.
I don't know if the law has too many "grey" areas when it comes to murder. Isn't Dr. K in jail now??
From a legal aspect I would say "yes" you should be charged, irregardless of the fact that the patient was going to die from cancer in 48hrs, doesn't change the fact that they died from a gunshot wound you inflicted.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

That story is hillarious Foxy!!!

Quote:

if some1 jumps off a building and then is shot dead by some1 as they are falling to their death..should that person still be charged with murder?

aren't there laws or su'in against shooting the person, even if they are already dead in mid-air? i dunno, just seems like there would be.

Hey guys, someone sent me some more funny lawsuits, too bad these people were able to get away it but they were still funny.

Tonya

1. January, 2000: Kathleen Robertson of Austin, Texas was awarded $780,000 by a jury of her peers after breaking her ankle tripping over a toddler who was running inside a furniture store. The owners of the store were understandably surprised at the verdict, considering the misbehaving little brat was Ms. Robertson's son.

2. June, 1998: A 19 year-old Carl Truman of Los Angeles won $74,000 and medical expenses when his neighbor ran over his hand with a Honda Accord. Mr. Truman apparently didn't notice there was someone at the wheel of the car when he was trying to steal his neighbor's hubcaps.

3. October, 1998: A Terence Dickson of Bristol, Pennsylvania was leaving a house he had just finished robbing by way of the garage. He was not able to get the garage door to go up since the automatic door opener was malfunctioning. He couldn't reenter the house because the door connecting the house and garage locked when he pulled it shut. The family was on vacation. Mr. Dickson found himself locked in the garage for eight days. He subsisted on a case of Pepsi he found, and a large bag of dry dog food. He sued the homeowner's insurance co., claiming the situation caused him undue mental anguish. The jury agreed to the tune of half a million dollars.

4. October, 1999: Jerry Williams of Little Rock, Arkansas was awarded $14,500 and medical expenses after being bitten on the buttocks by his next door neighbor's beagle. The beagle was on a chain in its owner's fenced-in yard. The award was less than Williams originally sought because the jury felt the dog might have been just a little provoked at the time by Mr. Williams, who was shooting it repeatedly with a pellet gun.

5. May, 2000: A Philadelphia restaurant was ordered to pay Amber Carson of Lancaster, Pennsylvania $113,500 after she slipped on a soft drink and broke her coccyx. The beverage was on the floor because Ms. Carson threw it at her boyfriend 30 seconds earlier during an argument.

6. December, 1997: Kara Walton of Claymont, Delaware successfully sued the owner of a night club in a neighboring city when she fell from the bathroom window to the floor and knocked out her two front teeth. >This occurred while Ms Walton was trying to sneak through the window
in the ladies room to avoid paying the $3.50 cover charge. She was awarded $12,000 and dental expenses.

And the winner is: Mr. Merv Grazinski of Oklahoma City. In November, 2000, Mr. Grazinski purchased a brand new 32 foot Winnebago motor home. On his first trip home, having joined the freeway, he set the cruise control at 70 mph and calmly left the drivers seat to go into the back and make himself a cup of coffee. Not surprisingly, the Winnie left the freeway, crashed, and overturned. Mr. Grazinski sued Winnebago for not advising him in the handbook that he couldn't actually do this. He was awarded $1,750,000 plus a new Winnie. (Winniebago actually changed their handbooks following this court case, just in case there are any other complete morons buying their vehicles.)

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Ho Shit!!! That last 1 is too fukkin much...HAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!

I can really appreciate this, being as how where I work, I'm threatened with frivolous lawsuits on an almost daily basis.
:cuss:
Elizabeth

Quote:

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Ho Shit!!! That last 1 is too fukkin much...HAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!

:laugh: :laugh: yeah really, since when did "cruise control" stand for "auto pilot"... :slap:

i doubt half that shit's real anyway, but funny still

Well....I don't know about anyone else, but after reading that, I need no further proof that our legal systen is a TOTAL joke! (Like I didn't know it already). :rofl:

Poetdude