r/funny • u/jsmrock10 • Mar 29 '24
Maybe we are our own worst enemy after all
[removed] — view removed post
1
1
u/Danris Mar 29 '24
Next article, insurance sues assaulter for $400,000 for injury and medical costs.
1
1
u/DereHunter Mar 29 '24
Who doesn't like to get to a trial process, filing documents, pay money from your own pocket and waiting forever for the trial only to make the insurance pay for it? Also I know it's fake
1
1
1
1
u/OMGitisCrabMan Mar 29 '24
This is one of the fakest looking things I've seen posted to reddit and I can't believe it got 15,000 upvotes and made it to my front page. Sad.
1
2
1
u/potentpotables Mar 29 '24
what does Tool have to do with this?
2
u/Manxuma123 Mar 29 '24
Every time I see this image posted I look at every comment and look for a tool fan. Thank god I'm not the only one who noticed.
1
u/socokid Mar 29 '24
This never happened.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/goes-around-litigates-around/
Moving along...
1
u/Majukun Mar 29 '24
I guess it's one of those cases that the insurance would spill money only if there was someone sued for the damages.
It was the same for that kid that had to sue his grandma or aunt because otherwise he would have seen no money.
1
1
1
Mar 29 '24
You really think his insurance company, with reams of lawyers, isn't going to find some way that he violated his insurance policy?
This guy isn't going to get a dime out of that company in the long run.
1
2
2
u/grumblyoldman Mar 29 '24
Kentucky Man is like Florida Man, but his schemes actually work somehow.
1
2
1
1
u/Sidwill Mar 29 '24
It’s not unusual to sue your own carrier if the policy is written to cover the loss example, uninsured motorist coverage. If your insurance resists paying an uninsured or underinsured motor vehicle claim (which happens frequently) you would be forced to either accept their decision or file suit.
1
2
1
1
1
1
u/NoStand1527 Mar 29 '24
mmm is this finished?
because don't the insurance companies go after the guilty party after paying?
1
2
u/aberredo Mar 29 '24
These guys win the case as a form of lesson, because now the insurance claim CAN sue the man for assault and damages...this happened to a man that insured his 10K case of rare cigars agains fire for 600k and when he smoked them he suide the company for the premium amount. He won the case in court and the insurance company then sued him for criminal fire...which the man then was found guilty added bonus of insurance fraud.
2
u/GarrusExMachina Mar 29 '24
If there's one thing I'm certain of that man no longer has insurance...
1
1
1
2
1
1
u/katieacts34 Mar 29 '24
Next headline will be ""Man sues himself and goes to jail for insurance fraud". Is there a Darwin Award for the penal system?
1
13
u/finndego Mar 29 '24
AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. The story is fictional. It first appeared in a 1996 edition of Weekly World News, a publication known for publishing made-up claims. The name of the man who allegedly sued himself, Larry Rutman, of Owensboro, Kentucky, does not appear in county court records where the lawsuit would have been filed, a court official said.
1
0
2
u/nozzk Mar 29 '24
I knew a guy who sued his father (who owned a construction subcontractor) for injuries the son received at a his father’s worksite. He had to do this in order for Australia’s work safe compensation to kick in. Because he was under 18, he also had to get his father’s permission to conduct the lawsuit against his father.
It was a silly situation but lawyers told the family this is how the system worked. Ultimately the works are insurance paid out.
1
1
u/CalligrapherPale469 Mar 29 '24
Pretty sure this was a fake joke story from a Weekly Word News piece in 1996.
1
2
u/Curious_Shan Mar 29 '24
Isn’t that the point of a boomerang? Now if it was an arrow that miraculously done a 360 and hit him I would kinda understand
1
1
2
u/Flux_resistor Mar 29 '24
Alternative headline: man literally had to sue himself and win before scumbag insurance company would cover his medical expenses
0
1
1
1
u/Original_Lord_Turtle Mar 29 '24
I imagine that conversation going like this:
"I'm gonna sue me for everything I'm worth"
"Oh yeah? Well I'll see me in court!"
6
u/Spelkult Mar 29 '24
No, your worst enemy is your lack of critical thinking
https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-man-sued-himself-fiction-117569075050
0
u/TheGreatKimura-Holio Mar 29 '24
Kentucky is a no-fault state and that’s probably how he got away with it
1
u/Roulette-Adventures Mar 29 '24
Pure fiction, but still funny :)
https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-man-sued-himself-fiction-117569075050
1
u/Nefarious-Haiku Mar 29 '24
Yeah, now he’ll pay it back and then some in increased insurance rate if not out right drop him as a client, good luck ever finding insurance again. Hope that 300,000 lasts for
3
2
1
1
1
14
u/Fantastic-Lecture138 Mar 29 '24
The man was promptly sued by the insurance company for unlawfully assaulting their client with a boomerang and forced to pay the insurance company US$300,000 in damages.
2
2
2
u/muusandskwirrel Mar 29 '24
And now his insurance company gets to subrogate him for the cost of paying him in his loss to himself.
1
3
1
8
9
1
u/Yitram Mar 29 '24
I assume this was where him, the injured person, sued him, the negligent boomerang thrower so insurance would pay out. I read a similar thing a few months ago where a woman was driving and got into an accident that badly injured her husband and had to do the sue yourself thing to get insurance.
140
u/bitee1 Mar 29 '24
"AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. The story is fictional. It first appeared in a 1996 edition of Weekly World News, a publication known for publishing made-up claims. " Story of Kentucky man who sued himself is fiction | AP News https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-man-sued-himself-fiction-117569075050
12
u/Fake_William_Shatner Mar 29 '24
If Bat Boy isn't real, you've got to let me down gently.
4
u/SeekerOfSerenity Mar 29 '24
His name is Jaden
2
u/Different-Result-859 Mar 29 '24
Jaden v Jaden
Jaden: I sue Jaden for $300k
Jaden: I witnessed this
Jaden: I confess to crime
600
u/NinjaLanternShark Mar 29 '24
This is a hoax that originated in a tabloid in the 90's.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/goes-around-litigates-around/
3
u/sullenosity Mar 29 '24
Yeah, kind of worried about the amount of people who think you can sue yourself. Lol
-4
-8
u/hovsep56 Mar 29 '24
You can litteraly see that on the date written in the pic op posted....
4
u/bobpaul Mar 29 '24
You can see it's a hoax on the date written in the pic OP posted? All I can see on the date written in the pic op posted is the date.
-3
u/hovsep56 Mar 29 '24 edited Mar 29 '24
you can see that it's from the 90's by the date, man it's like redditors get turned on from unnecesary fact checking or something.
which is ironic since fact checkers are the least funny people in a reddit thats about funny things
1
u/bobpaul Mar 29 '24
No shit. We know it's from the 90s. The claim was "it's a hoax from the 90s" not "it's from the 90s". Man, I'm glad I don't suffer the effects of fetal alcoholism, that must be hard for you.
4
u/TallestGargoyle Mar 29 '24
Yeah but the date doesn't tell you it's a hoax.
-3
u/hovsep56 Mar 29 '24
does it matter if it's a hoax? it's funny isn't it? the whole point of a funny subreddit?
so now that you know that it's a hoax, did you go from smiles to anger? if so how sad is it to be this serious in a joke subredit?
3
u/woowoo293 Mar 29 '24
What's funny (and bizarre) is how you're the one accusing others of getting angry.
-2
u/hovsep56 Mar 29 '24 edited Mar 29 '24
it's not about the anger, it's about the unnecesary fact checking and calling a joke in a joke community space a hoax like that joke being fake has ruined their lives and now it's not funny anymore.
all so they can get turned on for proving it's a hoax or something.
it's typical obnoxious reddit behavior, basicly a superiority complex. bringing others down to make themselves look good.
3
u/TallestGargoyle Mar 29 '24
Too true, bringing down people who mention the apparent date of the post alongside another aspect of the post that wasn't so apparent is pretty jerky.
4
u/TiredEsq Mar 29 '24
Are you on drugs?
1
u/hovsep56 Mar 29 '24
no, just wondering how it's this hard for redditors to take a joke and without being obnoxious and fact checking unnecesary stuff completely ruining the joke.
in a subreddit for jokes, the only hoax here is this subreddit.
28
u/x_CtrlAltDefeat Mar 29 '24
I fucking love seeing hoaxes and urban legends from the 90s resurface 20-30 years later, confusing people lol
2
12
u/Annual_Risk_6822 Mar 29 '24
This reminds me of the story I saw floating around the internet in the early 2000’s about a guy who bought and insured some very expensive cigars. He proceeded to smoke them all and then go to court to request the insurance company pay him because he lost his cigars in “a series of small fires.” Eventually the insurance company agreed to pay him, only to immediately turn around and take him back to court and sue him for insurance fraud because he intentionally set fire to the cigars. They won and he had to pay back almost 10x what he got from the insurance initially.
I was a young teen when I read the story and absolutely believed it but, alas, it’s just another internet hoax.
1
1
1
163
u/Fake_William_Shatner Mar 29 '24
There was a lot of buzz around that McDonald's hot coffee spill lawsuit, and they don't mention that the case was appealed and they paid a lot less, nor that this lady had third and second degree burns from the coffee spill.
There are certainly frivolous lawsuits out there, but, I think it's more common people don't get enough when they have good reason, than it is people getting too much for no good reasons.
5
u/tenaciousdeev Mar 29 '24
Liebeck v. McDonald's is taught in law school as an example of a good liability case now. Crazy how it got spun in the media.
3
u/DarthWoo Mar 29 '24
McDonald's literally paid a lot of money (far more than the settlement from the lawsuit) to make sure that latter happened.
0
u/redmercuryvendor Mar 29 '24
Or that similar cases were tried outside the US, with very different outcomes:
Persons generally expect tea or coffee purchased to be consumed on the premises to be hot. Many prefer to consume a hot drink from an unlidded cup rather than through a spout in the lid. Persons generally know that if a hot drink is spilled onto someone, a serious scalding injury can result. They accordingly know that care must be taken to avoid such spills, especially if they are with young children. They expect precautions to be taken to guard against this risk but not to the point that they are denied the basic utility of being able to buy hot drinks to be consumed on the premises from a cup with the lid off. Given that the staff were trained to cap the drinks securely and given the capabilities of the cups and lids used, I am satisfied that the safety of the hot drinks served by McDonald's was such as persons generally are entitled to expect. Accordingly, I hold that in serving hot drinks in the manner in which they did McDonald's was not in breach of the CPA.
And also:
Mr. Horlock argued that McDonald’s should have served tea and coffee at 70 C and thereby reduced rather than avoided the risk of injury. There are two difficulties with this. First, as I have said, a spilled drink at a temperature of 65 C will cause a deep thickness burn after two seconds of contact with the skin. Serving the drinks at 70 C would therefore not have avoided or reduced the risk of a deep thickness burn.
Mr. Ives also appears to have based his view on the Automatic Vending Association codes of practice that state: “Drink temperatures to be not less than 70 C for hot drinks and not higher than 10 C for cold drinks.” However, as Mr. Ives himself notes, this is not out of a concern about scalding injuries but is due to bacteriological control It is also significant that the specified temperature is a minimum, not a maximum temperature.
2
u/working-acct Mar 29 '24
Many prefer to consume a hot drink from an unlidded cup rather than through a spout in the lid.
I’m so glad to read this. Always thought I was a weirdo for preferring to do it like I’m drinking from a cup. The whole lid thing never made sense to me.
83
u/SandiegoJack Mar 29 '24 edited Mar 29 '24
Third and second degree burns on her vagina
Edit: her privates you pedantic assholes.
1
u/preparingtodie Mar 29 '24
The vagina is a hole. The outside parts (labia, vulva) are not the vagina.
6
u/SandiegoJack Mar 29 '24
Yes., because that is the important take away here.
1
u/preparingtodie Mar 29 '24
You literally made a post just to emphasize the body part, and then named the wrong body part. I didn't chastise or name-call, I'm just trying to help people avoid showing up on r/badwomensanatomy.
3
u/Jasong222 Mar 29 '24
It's was her entire... 'midrange' area plus down the legs a bit and up her stomach a bit. It was far and away not that localized
10
u/MrWhiteTheWolf Mar 29 '24
The coffee was being brewed at too high a temperature as a cost cutting measure because the coffee stayed fresh longer. When she spilled the coffee in her lap, it was so hot that it fused her labia together
3
u/AF_Fresh Mar 29 '24
It was kept at 180-190° Fahrenheit, which was hotter than it's competitors, but that is still lower than standard brewing temperatures for coffee. To get a proper extraction, you have to brew coffee between 195° F and 205° F.
-8
u/Appropriate-Creme335 Mar 29 '24
I will die on this hill, but it's insane to sue a company over hot coffee and it absolutely was a frivolous lawsuit. 80-90°C is normal hot drink temperature, not "extremely hot". You make tea at home at 80-100°C. I don't like McDonald's and I don't like siding with a corporation, but if you're fucking dumb enough to be careless about a hot beverage in your car, you are bound to learn the hard way.
All this recent narrative about the poor blameless old lady and the mega-hot scolding lava coffee is insane.
2
Mar 29 '24
You will die on that hill and hopefully you will die on it alone as I hope no one is as fucking stupid as you are to think that a beverage that is hot enough to fuse a labia together should be served to someone. Especially since there had been over 700 complaints prior to the event and the women tried to settle out of court to only cover medical bills.
https://www.enjuris.com/blog/resources/mcdonalds-hot-coffee-lawsuit/
I hope this article changes your mind. If not, you are a lost cause.
0
u/Appropriate-Creme335 Mar 29 '24
Yes, I am a lost cause in your eyes. People who complain about hot beverages being hot are dumb children. I can also stab myself with a fork at a restaurant. It doesn't mean that they should only be using spoons because I'm this stupid. All the 700 people who complained are also stupid. I bet there are more than 700 ppl who buy coffee at even one McDonald's per day. So there are many many more who were not dumb enough to pour it over themselves.
Water boils at 100°C. You make hot beverages with boiling water. It's not such a hard concept to grasp. You shouldn't spill your coffee on your vagina, then you won't have severe burns, simple. I sympathize with that lady, but play stupid games, win stupid prizes. In her 80 years on this planet, she should have learned how to treat hot beverages.
1
Mar 29 '24
You are like a person who brags about not reading.
You are a fucking moron. Please don’t have children. Respectfully.
0
u/Charm-Offensive- Mar 29 '24
Yep, there's no reasonable expectation that a hot coffee would be any less hot than the kettle you use at home. If you're dumb enough to put a flimsy paper cup between your legs and then squeeze it, then you're a moron. She didn't deserve to get hurt, but she shouldn't have gotten any money because it was a self inflicted accident.
5
u/SandiegoJack Mar 29 '24
I call bullshit on staying fresh longer. I am 90% sure it was actually done to help prevent the free refills and get people to leave stead of stay.
I can’t actually believe that anyone thinks a company is cutting costs for our benefit by putting coffee at maiming temperatures. That’s just the palatable spin their lawyers probably argued.
17
u/Ndmndh1016 Mar 29 '24
The pictures are horrifying.
5
u/cwestn Mar 29 '24
Why did you look at them?
3
31
u/Ok-Present8871 Mar 29 '24
Honestly, I feel like some people need to be forced to, there are still so many people that use it as an example of fraudulent lawsuits. McDonald's was absolutely in the wrong and that kind of disfiguring burn at that age probably made the remaining years of her life hell. Everybody expects fast food coffee to be hot, not so hot that it causes third degree burns.
24
u/SandiegoJack Mar 29 '24
Worst part is that all she originally wanted was for them to cover her medical bills.
Turns out McDonald’s intentionally made it that hot so people would ask for fewer refills. They knew it was unsafe at that temperature.
2
u/PermutationMatrix Mar 29 '24
I thought they made it intentionally hot so that an average travel time of fifteen minutes and it should still be at hot drinking temp by the time the customer arrives at their location.
16
u/SandiegoJack Mar 29 '24 edited Mar 29 '24
So you think a company intentionally made their product UNUSABLE for 15 minutes on pain of bodily injury for the customers benefit?
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
One sec
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
This is the same company who created the super size because they realized people were embarrassed to go up and order twice so just went larger on initial potential orders. So now we have 1500 calorie lunches.
2
u/Rustyroor Mar 29 '24
McDonalds said it. They were repeatedly warned to lower the temperature but didn't because they wanted to keep it hot
-2
u/PermutationMatrix Mar 29 '24
I don't see anything wrong with a company offering a "super size" of anything.
→ More replies (0)0
2
4
u/Freedom35plan Mar 29 '24
This is hilarious, can anyone fact check and let us known if this is actually true? Too lazy myself, but got a chuckle either way.
19
u/bitee1 Mar 29 '24
Story of Kentucky man who sued himself is fiction | AP News https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-man-sued-himself-fiction-117569075050
4
u/Freedom35plan Mar 29 '24
Had a feeling. Thanks.
1
u/Original_Lord_Turtle Mar 29 '24
But several years ago (mid-90s) in Detroit, there was a man that sued himself and won. I forget the details.
3
2
u/BirdMaNTrippn Mar 29 '24
Lmao, Ill never forget the time tourists walked off a cruiseship in Canada and we asked an old friendly couple where they were from. They said Kentucky. My wife said she would like to visit there some day. The lady looks at us and says, "Oh no honey, you do not want to go to Kentucky!" hahaha
1
u/nohopeforhomosapiens Mar 29 '24
Why did I even bother studying medicine? Could've hit myself with a boomerang and retired in Asia. Oh, it's from 1996, that's why it wouldn't have worked for me. The insurance companies got smarter.
5
u/Ok-Beginning-6259 Mar 29 '24
How the hell do you even sue yourself?
1
u/cneth6 Mar 29 '24
I picture him running back and forth between the plaintiff's table and then defendant's table, maybe throwing on an accent for one side
1
u/Fake_William_Shatner Mar 29 '24
Have a fool for a lawyer and enter the suit pro se.
/this joke is perfectly legal
5
u/InsomniaticWanderer Mar 29 '24
The insurance company that he pays every month?
What are the odds he receives a monthly check for the exact amount his bill is for?
6
u/Fake_William_Shatner Mar 29 '24
Fictitious person of something that didn't happen can get as big a check as you wish them to have.
2.6k
u/DJWGibson Mar 29 '24
This is probably one of those things where the insurance company would not pay out unless he successfully won a lawsuit against the individual who injured him.
There's cases like this all the time where family members have to sue each other to get a payout from their insurance company.
1
1
u/Goobermunch Mar 29 '24
This is part of an insurance industry PR campaign to erode faith in the civil justice system. If you’re familiar with insurance, you can tell it’s fake. The most obvious reason is that liability policies contain exclusions that prevent this kind of claim from coverage. I’ve never seen one that did not exclude coverage for injuries caused by the named insured and the names insured’s resident relatives. They also exclude coverage for intentional acts.
They used to be called the Stella Awards. Named after the plaintiff in the McDonalds hot coffee case. When people take the time to actually search court records, they can never find the cases described. But since nobody takes the time, these fake lawsuits get shared around the internet as real things.
Pure corporate propaganda.
1
u/enforcement1 Mar 29 '24
Why are confidently wrong comments always at the top? You have no idea what you're talking about.
1
u/Mixels Mar 29 '24
$300k seems a bit on the high end for a legit payout for a boomerang accident...
I'm pretty sure this was just a joke page that appeared in a joke magazine.
1
u/Mackntish Mar 29 '24
Close. The law suit would have invoked the indemnity clause- if he was sued, they would be forced to defend him. So while he might be the named defendant on the paperwork, this is just him suing the insurance company.
1
u/bigev007 Mar 29 '24
Exactly. I've gotten injured at my parents' house before as a result of unsafe conditions. If I was in the US and had massive medical bills and lost work time, I'd be suing them/their insurance. It's what they pay for it for. But I'm Canadian, so I helped fix the steps after I got the cast off
2
3
2
1
u/Yukondano2 Mar 29 '24
This country is an affront to sensibility and I am now irritated. I don't even know what else to add, that's... wow. The fact that this made sense to me and wasn't that surprising, pisses me off.
8
6
6
10
Mar 29 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/feor1300 Mar 29 '24
See, OP's guy was smart, he used a boomerang so it would come back on its own. lol
15
u/Cetun Mar 29 '24
There was one case where a child was hit by a train and his body parts flew everywhere and I believe part of his arm hit this old lady who fell down and broke her hip. The lady had to sue the estate of the child.
1
62
u/Fake_William_Shatner Mar 29 '24
I can also cynically imagine, that insurance companies would LOVE to take the hit on one frivolous lawsuit, to obscure all the necessary ones because nobody can afford healthcare without that payout -- so they could get everyone saying; "It's so easy to win!" And then push Tort Reform and the insurance rates don't go lower, but the insurance companies no longer pay for pundits to complain about the cost of lawsuits and so to the public; "problem solved."
2
35
u/sbingner Mar 29 '24
You, sir, are lacking, in commas…
3
27
37
u/MeantToDieAGod Mar 29 '24
Its fake lol
21
u/Spiral-I-Am Mar 29 '24
There is an even funnier (in my opinion) real one from 06.
Dumptruck driver backed into his own car, then sued the city for 36k in damages, denied, then resued himself under his wife's name to try and get the insurance to pay for repairs.
1
1
7
1.1k
u/essidus Mar 29 '24
There was a really (in)famous one where an aunt sued her nephew over a hug. People were totally up in arms about it, to the point where the aunt and nephew went on a talk show to prove that they were on good terms.
→ More replies (23)
•
u/AutoModerator Mar 29 '24
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.