StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I was watching Judge Judy[1] a few weeks ago and the following case came up. The male plaintiff walked into a movie after it started, and he proceeded to talk to friends throughout the movie. He was asked to shut up by the female defendant; instead, he swore at her and continued to talk. The defendant got up to leave, and intentionally poured her coke on him. He got up and chased her into the parking lot. he insisted that they file a police report, and the he sued her for several thousand dollars of damaged. He claimed damages of permanent eye damage (from the coke) and permanent back injury from being startled. (Note that he was able to chase her after this alleged back damage occurred). He was only able to provide one bill, which was $40 for an eye exam.

So, what would you decide?

You can tell my thoughts from the tone of the post. However, if anything, I'm being too fair to him. Even the judge commented on how he was lying when he told his side of events (he said that you're supposed to arrive at a movie after it starts, and that he didn't talk during the movie). She also said that she though he needed psychological help. If this case came before Judge Celes I would give the defendant $20... $10 for the movie, and $10 for services rendered to mankind by dumping the drink on him. Well, OK, a judge can't do that, but at the most I would give the plaintiff the $40 for the eye exam.

Anyway, Judge Judy said "You proved $40 in damaged, and I'm awarding your 10 times that." $400

Was justice done?


[1]For those of you with lives, Judge Judith Schinlein(sp?) is a former New York judge who has a TV show where people bring small claims legal action and she decided who's at fault and what the guilty party should pay. She's very popular and allegedly just sighed a $100 million contract. I have friends who watch it a lot, so I tend to see it too.

He shouldn't have gotten any punative (sp?). $40, and get the hell out of the courtroom.

If he'd been in the cinema with me or any of my friends he would have been left unconcious stuffed under one of the seats if he'd been lucky...

If he'd been unlucky he'd have been concious, bound, gagged and stuffed under one of the seats.

Yes justice was done, the theater ushers are there to ensure that patrons comply to the rules of entry, if you have a problem with another patron, you get the usher to sort it out.

Assaulting another patron, is just that assault.

While the judgement of $400 isn't something I can see why she would give, considering that he only had an ability to account for $40, I didn't hear the case so I can't comment.

You forgot to mention something. When the defendent originally asked him to be queit, he replied "We're not talking loud enough to disturb you, bitch."

I would only have awarded him the 40$

Judge Judy had no conceivable reason to multiply the damage by 10 times, except for habitual damage elevation among the American judiciary.

If I were the judge, I would throw the case out of court as an obviously frivolous lawsuit, and tell him that the only damages he could have legitimately claimed would be dry-cleaning and the cost of the movie ticket. His attempt to claim serious personal injury was fraudulent legal opportunism at its worst.

People like that are why I've been trying to obtain a tranquiliser pistol for so long...

*kids begin talking in movie*

*thwip* Kid 1 slumps over

"hey-"

*thwip* kid 2 slumps over

"What -"

*thwip* idiot parent who wasn't controlling their kids slumps over and becomes target practice for trained silent urination monkeys.

Speaking of arriving late for movies.

When the TTTs was first released in theaters I bought my ticket expecting that since it was clearly (10-15 minutes) after the start time of the most recent start to,e that I would automatically get a ticket for the next showing. So, I went into the theater and the movie had already started. I left and went back and specifically asked for my ticket to be changed to the next showing. I had to jump through a few minor hoops to get it fixed but they did it without too much trouble.

It just pisses me off. They keep issuing tickets for a movie based on what they think is the amount of time the stupid previews will run before the movie starts. If I would have accepted that in this case TTT would have started with the part where Frodo wakes up after his Gandalf dream completely missing the opening with Gandalf and the Balrog.

I mainly bring this up because it's possible that the theater is at least partially responsible for why this guy showed up late for the film. Still the talking was all him. From the sound of it I'm surprised that he didn't talk on his cell phone as well.

Someone mentioned ushers, it's been a long time since I've been to a theater or multiplex where I would call the people working there ushers. I'm certain some of them would do the job in a pinch but I remember when there were people with flashlights that kept and eye on things without you having to miss half the movie tracking them down to deal with some trouble makers. You would think with the price of movie tickets now that theaters could afford to hire big bouncer types to crack the skulls of inconsiderate theater patrons.

There should be a strict rule in movie theaters, "When the movie is playing Shut The Fuck Up" if you can`t be quiet for the duration of the movie leave.

Is that a real court of law or just TV drama?

Faram wrote:Is that a real court of law or just TV drama?

Both parties in the case waive their righ to an actual court appearance. for what is essentially a made for TV version settled at the "judges" discretion. (each side signs a contract that obligates them to go with the judges decision) And IIRC both of the parties involved are compensated for their appearance. Judge Judy has as much jurisdiction in real life as my dick has in a girl's locker room. Judy probably jacked up the damage so that it wouldn't be a $40 case and a total waste of tv air time. (which her show is anyway)

How many Judge show are on tv now?

There is Judge Judy,Judge Joe brown...and the judge who refereed boxing matches,so are there any others?

Let's see, an obnoxious prick wouldn't shut the hell up and got coke poured on him, and then he claims his eyes and back got fucked up? That's a big crock of shit if I've ever heard one. Justice done my ass, if I was the judge the case would get tossed out and I'd find a way to fine or jail the lying scumbag for wasting my time.

Let's see: what is justice, as far as lawyer's are concerned? To all client's of lawyers: justice is what they think they deserve (or so the head of the Office of Legal Services here in NSW told us- in the context of, consumers of legal services want "justice")

Did the guy get justice? No.

Did the girl get justice? No.

I think that justice was done, the defendant got roughly $5,000 (that's what I've heard) for showing up, so she got $4,600 from the case, and thus the only human in the case (prehaps the only human in the court-room) was rewarded for punishing scum of the Earth. Thus Justice.

So the guy only received 400 dollars? Muahahaahahahaa.~Jason

General comments:

The plaintiff apparently intentionally came late to the movie. I presume that he thought that there would be 20 minutes (or whatever) of previews, so he came 20 minutes after when his ticket said the movie would start. However, his timing was off and he arrived after the movie itself started.

He was, without question, a dick. That doesn’t excuse the defendant’s actions—she should have just got up and left. Hence, she should pay for the damages she caused. However, the real question is whether that extra $360 was justified. If the defendant was an aggressive person who picked the fight with an ordinary person, then I would agree that she should be punished by having to pay extra. But in this case it seemed clear that the plaintiff was indirectly the aggressive party, and the defendant was merely acting like a normal person, albeit one who lost control of herself.

Judge Judy is a real judge and the cases are real cases. Both parties agree to have JJ settle the case. IIRC, The losing party doesn't have to pay anything. The show's producers pay the winning party whatever the settle meant was.

I doubt that the inflated amount was for drama. The drama comes from the idiots, not the verdict. A fair number of cases end without anyone having to pay anything. On a side note, I remember a People's Court case years back where the plaintiff was only suing for $3.50 or something like that. Neat.

Here's a link to a page that has clips of the show, and the check he recieved from the producers. Judge Judy: "You don't seem to get the drill here... in court. In a court I ask the questions, and you answer the questions. So far you've answered the questions and you gotten most of them wrong."

Tsyroc wrote: Someone mentioned ushers, it's been a long time since I've been to a theater or multiplex where I would call the people working there ushers. I'm certain some of them would do the job in a pinch but I remember when there were people with flashlights that kept and eye on things without you having to miss half the movie tracking them down to deal with some trouble makers. You would think with the price of movie tickets now that theaters could afford to hire big bouncer types to crack the skulls of inconsiderate theater patrons.

The Odeon in the UK does hire bouncers.....I know, I was one of them....easiest money I've ever made....sit and watch films, then intimidate assholes whenever radioed to do so....

Keevan_Colton wrote:
The Odeon in the UK does hire bouncers.....I know, I was one of them....easiest money I've ever made....sit and watch films, then intimidate assholes whenever radioed to do so....

We could use something like that here. All the people we got are there to take tickets, work the concessions and clean up. I can't think of any theater employee that I've seen that would be remotely intimidating.

Montcalm wrote:There should be a strict rule in movie theaters, "When the movie is playing Shut The Fuck Up" if you can`t be quiet for the duration of the movie leave.

I was just watching an episode of Firefly where Shepherd Book mentions the special Hell reserved for child molesters and people who talk at the theater.

Tsyroc wrote:We could use something like that here. All the people we got are there to take tickets, work the concessions and clean up. I can't think of any theater employee that I've seen that would be remotely intimidating.

I dunno, I've seen some ushers who were scary. If you were to punch that pimple-infested face, it might very well explode in a shower of pus, which is going to terrify any man.

Darth Wong wrote:I dunno, I've seen some ushers who were scary. If you were to punch that pimple-infested face, it might very well explode in a shower of pus, which is going to terrify any man.

Good point. There are a few people who work at the theater I frequent who give me the creeps.

Because this was an intentional assault, it is sometimes conceivable to multiply the actual damages by three to represent punitive damages. $400 is obviously excessive, and I have no idea why she would have awarded this sum. If it had been me, I would probably have thrown out the case, and told him that he shouldn't have attempted to claim serious physical injury. At best (for him) I would've awarded him a dry cleaning bill and the money for the eye-exam, but since most people should take eye-exams frequently it's not even clear to me that he should have been given that much (I would have to look at the case more completely).

Hell, SHE should've gotten the $400 for doing a service to movie-goers....

Master of Ossus wrote:Because this was an intentional assault, it is sometimes conceivable to multiply the actual damages by three to represent punitive damages. $400 is obviously excessive, and I have no idea why she would have awarded this sum. If it had been me, I would probably have thrown out the case, and told him that he shouldn't have attempted to claim serious physical injury.

I would have told him he had obviously perjured himself and should count himself lucky that I don't hold him in contempt of court. The eye-injury claim is bad enough, but the back injury is such fucking bullshit that I'd put him in Ass-Pounder Hotel as an example

At best (for him) I would've awarded him a dry cleaning bill and the money for the eye-exam, but since most people should take eye-exams frequently it's not even clear to me that he should have been given that much (I would have to look at the case more completely).

I would award him dry-cleaning and the cost of the movie ticket, but he obviously took the eye exam for the sole purpose of generating paperwork to support his fraudulent claim of serious personal injury. He clearly thought he had an opportunity to make some easy money.