Dennis Kucinich is actually as wimpy as he looks.

[cosmicalstorm]

Certainly. But the point I was trying to make is that prudence dictates that the actual filing of the lawsuit wait until the medical professionals have time to make proper assessments. That Kucinich waited to file was taken by some as evidence that he's greedy. That just doesn't fly.

I'd say the amount he's demanding is more indicative of greed than anything else. I just can't fathom how any damage that was caused is capable of running that high.

Dental work can cost a lot of money. I lost my two maxillary frontal incisors in an assault when I was 17, two years later when my titanium implants were finished the final cost ended up at ~$7000 due to complications and so on. And this happened in Sweden which is a pretty reasonable country in terms of price of dental care and health-care overall. The medical bills in America are much worse. I'm sure that a couple of temporary fillings, lab manufactured crowns and some oral surgery can easily net you a dental bill of $10.000 or so.

[General Zod]

Dental work can cost a lot of money. I lost my two maxillary frontal incisors in an assault when I was 17, two years later when my titanium implants were finished the final cost ended up at ~$7000 due to complications and so on. And this happened in Sweden which is a pretty reasonable country in terms of price of dental care and health-care overall. The medical bills in America are much worse. I'm sure that a couple of temporary fillings, lab manufactured crowns and some oral surgery can easily net you a dental bill of $10.000 or so.

I'm well aware of how much it can cost, I've had to visit the dentist a number of times over the last few years for crowns, root canals and wisdom teeth removals. That ran me about $5,000 on a shitty health plan. But we're talking about a Congress-critter with free health care. Not your average US citizen.

[Darth Fanboy]

Dude, $150,000 for a tooth? Yeah i'm sure it hurt like hell and required lots work to fix but that's a lot of cash for one tooth, I don't claim to know what the motivation is, nor do I have to to think that the amount being sought is rather steep. My problem isn't that he is allowed to sue, it's that the suit appears to be for far more than what seems reasonable.

[Phantasee]

He's probably just shooting for the moon? The final result can be less, especially if they just settle (less legal fees that way).

[Jadeite]

Dude, $150,000 for a tooth? Yeah i'm sure it hurt like hell and required lots work to fix but that's a lot of cash for one tooth, I don't claim to know what the motivation is, nor do I have to to think that the amount being sought is rather steep. My problem isn't that he is allowed to sue, it's that the suit appears to be for far more than what seems reasonable.

Have you never fucking negotiated anything in your life? Its a common tactic, start with an extreme that you don't expect to get, then work your way down from there to something that you're happy with. It's not like $150k is even really that large an amount of money when dealing with corporate revenues, I would bet that its probably a rounding error to them.

[Phantasee]

You do realize that not all business are monolithic entities that lose hundreds of thousands of dollars in the sofa cushions, right? A cafeteria could conceivably be run by a smaller business that only make a few million a year in revenue, at which point $150 000 is a big chunk of change.

[Ziggy Stardust]

You do realize that not all business are monolithic entities that lose hundreds of thousands of dollars in the sofa cushions, right? A cafeteria could conceivably be run by a smaller business that only make a few million a year in revenue, at which point $150 000 is a big chunk of change.

First of all, we are talking about the CONGRESSIONAL CAFETERIA. You really think that's going to be run by a mom and pop outfit? Please.

Second of all, there are actually four separate companies that "run" the Cafeteria, according to various news sources. The $150,000 would be divided between the four of them. A little Google-fu indicates that the four companies named in the suit are Restaurant Associates, Compass Group USA Inc., Performance Food Group Co., and Foodbuy LLC. All of them are large and extremely profitable (I have a hard time finding information, but Performance Food Group Co. alone was a Fortune 500 in 2008, with over $6 billion in revenue; it seems to have since slipped from the list).

[Alyrium Denryle]

But we're talking about a Congress-critter with free health care. Not your average US citizen.

Congresscritters actually have the same insurance policy that every other federal employee gets. I am not sure how good the dental plan is...

That said...

1) Punitive damages. Part of a lawsuit is almost always to punish the person or entity who committed a bad act. To make sure they dont do it again.

2) Dental injuries hurt like a motherfucker. Someone threw a rock at mew in jr high (Hate crime) and chipped one of my teeth. It STILL hurts. The tooth is, for example, amazingly sensitive. He probably had to be anesthetized for oral surgery and ended up like this on several occasions:



Some of you may consider that fun. A guy like Kucinich though I would imagine would consider it a significant loss of his dignity. I know I would.

The list of the possible suffering goes on and on.

3) Haggling. In many US jurisdictions, you have to claim an initial amount of damages you are seeking, but what you actually get will be determined by a judge and jury. In the case of a settlement, which is more likely to occur than this ever seeing the inside of a court, it is a high-ball. An initial high demand that gets haggled down in negotiations. He will probably end up settling for 30k or something.

[Darth Fanboy]

Have you never fucking negotiated anything in your life?

Easy killer. I think the amount of the lawsuit is way too steep I didn't call your sister/mother/pet salamander/whatever a whore.

Its a common tactic, start with an extreme that you don't expect to get, then work your way down from there to something that you're happy with. It's not like $150k is even really that large an amount of money when dealing with corporate revenues, I would bet that its probably a rounding error to them.

A quick google search shows both companies (performance food and compass group) sell a lot. I still don't buy that a tooth is worth $150,000. I didn't say he couldn't sue or that he wasn't even allowed to sue for that much, but in this case I do believe that he's asking for way too much and I hope he'd be called out for it in court. I don't think it is ethical to use the court system in that manner. I'd love to know why Dennis Kucinich's tooth is worth more than three times the US median household income.

[Alyrium Denryle]

A quick google search shows both companies (performance food and compass group) sell a lot. I still don't buy that a tooth is worth $150,000. I didn't say he couldn't sue or that he wasn't even allowed to sue for that much, but in this case I do believe that he's asking for way too much and I hope he'd be called out for it in court. I don't think it is ethical to use the court system in that manner. I'd love to know why Dennis Kucinich's tooth is worth more than three times the US median household income.

Read the post above. Combination of punishing them for being idiots, the value of potentially constant pain, and the fact that when you go into negotiations for a settlement, you start with an offer way the fuck higher than you think you deserve, and then haggle like you would with a street vendor in Romania.

[General Zod]

2) Dental injuries hurt like a motherfucker. Someone threw a rock at mew in jr high (Hate crime) and chipped one of my teeth. It STILL hurts. The tooth is, for example, amazingly sensitive. He probably had to be anesthetized for oral surgery and ended up like this on several occasions:

Pain can be very subjective, so I'm not sure how much of this I'd take into consideration. I've had an abcessed tooth before and frankly I'm not convinced there's anything more excruciating than that.

[Alyrium Denryle]

2) Dental injuries hurt like a motherfucker. Someone threw a rock at mew in jr high (Hate crime) and chipped one of my teeth. It STILL hurts. The tooth is, for example, amazingly sensitive. He probably had to be anesthetized for oral surgery and ended up like this on several occasions:

Pain can be very subjective, so I'm not sure how much of this I'd take into consideration. I've had an abcessed tooth before and frankly I'm not convinced there's anything more excruciating than that.

Of course pain is subjective. No shit sherlock. On the other hand, if the damage is permanent... well...

There is a reason the actual award is done by judge and jury. That is all there is to it. We have the ability to request monetary damages for pain and suffering, it is being used. I dont see the problem. Thanks to the Exxon Valdez case though, those punitive cannot exceed the actual damages (IIRC)

[Master of Ossus]

@ Alyrium

Two things:

1. Punitive damages can only be requested if the plaintiff is claiming that the defendant's level of fault exceeded negligence. I find it very unlikely that he can claim that the cafeteria intentionally or even recklessly placed the unpitted olive in his sandwich in the hopes that he would hurt himself. No matter what your politics, that's pretty extreme. Kucinich had better know something that we don't. Otherwise the punitive damages excuse is bullshit.

2. Punitive damages can exceed actual damages. Exxon's 1:1 ratio limit only applies to maritime cases (the original award was something like $5 billion in punitive damages, or roughly 17.5 times the amount of compensatory damages awarded by the jury). Punitive damages do have to be proportionate to actual damages in other cases, but in Campbell v. State Farm the Supreme Court seemed willing to accept a 4:1 punitive:compensatory damages figure, and stated that there is no fixed ratio of constitutionality in most tort cases--100:1 or more might well be justified in certain circumstances (and the Court listed numerous factors to consider when deciding whether or not an award was constitutional). In fact, as recently as 1993, the Court upheld a punitive damages claim that was over 500 times the compensatory damage figure awarded (TXO Production v. Alliance Resources). Scalia, in fact, has repeatedly asserted his view that the Constitution does not impose a limit on punitive damages.

[ArmorPierce]

I don't get what's so outrageous for dennis kucinich suing for 150k. He bit down into a sandwich which was improperly prepared and suffered permanent damage. Suing is not just to make back money that it cost to get prepared but to also punish people.

[Master of Ossus]

I don't get what's so outrageous for dennis kucinich suing for 150k. He bit down into a sandwich which was improperly prepared and suffered permanent damage. Suing is not just to make back money that it cost to get prepared but to also punish people.

See my above post. Punitive damages are not available unless he alleges some state of culpability higher than negligence--precisely what you have described. If the events took place as you stated, he cannot be suing "to also punish people." In order to justify a punitive damage claim, he would have to argue that the defendant had intentionally placed the unpitted olive in his sandwich in order to injure him. As it is, Kucinich comes across as a complete jerk whose eggshell skull was dinged by an accident and who wants to make some money out of it.

[Darth Fanboy]

To clarify, no dental expenses were covered by any health plan, nor did I have dental insurance that covered the injury, which, until it was resolved, affected my ability to chew food properly.

Fuck even I have basic insurance that would cover all/part of this.

Between that and the previously unexplained emergency medical situation (intestinal blockage eh?) I can see now why this figure has reached the six figure mark. Curious though why it took so long to pull the tooth but then again I am not a dentist.

That being said I abdicate my position and am now in favor of a thread title change, preferably with a tooth pun in there somewhere.

[Phantasee]

Kucinich Takes a Bite Out of Congressional Cafeteria Companies? You get a bit of pun and a lot of alliteration, there.

[KrauserKrauser]

I like how he admits that the real reason for the severity of the injury was not just the olive pit but his waiting until the problem became deadly to finally consult a physician.

Had he gone the same day or the next day it would have been a significantly lesser medical incident,

But honestly should we expect anything different from a congress critter? Their modus operandi is to ignore problems until they become crises. Preventative mainptenance? Immediate follow up of a matter instead of inaction? It amazes me how much he is willing to throw this situation at the fault of the company when bhis own inaction took it from some serious dental work to a life threatening injury.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I like how he admits that the real reason for the severity of the injury was not just the olive pit but his waiting until the problem became deadly to finally consult a physician.

And? Do you like going to the dentist? Is he able to know the extent of the injury, or did he assume it was just a chip? Probably the latter option.

But honestly should we expect anything different from a congress critter?

No. In fact, we should not expect any differently from most people. There is a guy I know. Vertebrate systematist and ecologist. He does a lot of his field-work in Africa. One day, he slipped and twisted his ankle. Only being slightly bothered by the injury, he continues about his field season.

He gets back to the states and sees his doctor about what he thinks is a minor injury. It turns out that it is a hairline fracture at just the right location that if he twisted his leg the wrong way, the bone could dislodge from itself and cause severe internal damage to his leg.

The moral of the story is that even the smartest people will dramatically under-estimate the damage to themselves, because it is NOT WITHIN THEIR AREA OF EXPERTISE!

[Master of Ossus]

And? Do you like going to the dentist? Is he able to know the extent of the injury, or did he assume it was just a chip? Probably the latter option.

A chip accompanied by "excruciating" pain?

No. In fact, we should not expect any differently from most people.

That doesn't mean that we should encourage the behavior of ignoring medical problems to the point where they radically and demonstrably increase the eventual cost of treatment. Kucinich's inaction took what should have been a relatively minor injury and made it into a more serious one by layering on additional complicationes (even apart from the ridiculous egg-shell-skulliness he exhibited throughout). He took grossly inadequate steps to mitigate the damages he suffered--a major and fundamental requirement of tort law. He shouldn't be rewarded for it, and the cafeteria shouldn't be punished for what are clearly unforeseeably large damages.

There is a guy I know. Vertebrate systematist and ecologist. He does a lot of his field-work in Africa. One day, he slipped and twisted his ankle. Only being slightly bothered by the injury, he continues about his field season.

He gets back to the states and sees his doctor about what he thinks is a minor injury. It turns out that it is a hairline fracture at just the right location that if he twisted his leg the wrong way, the bone could dislodge from itself and cause severe internal damage to his leg.

The moral of the story is that even the smartest people will dramatically under-estimate the damage to themselves, because it is NOT WITHIN THEIR AREA OF EXPERTISE!

The differences between this and the Kucinich story are manifest. For one thing, your friend didn't go back and try and sue someone for the injuries he sustained for the extent of his exacerbated injuries.

[Simon_Jester]

It occurs to me, MoO, that if we apply this standard to the average American citizen we run into a problem. In many cases, they're suing over an issue like this because they need the money to live. What happens if someone suffers an injury like Ben's friend due to someone else's negligence? What if, in theory, they could have sought treatment immediately and been fine, but don't realize how badly they've been injured and the problem becomes crippling?

What should they do?

[Master of Ossus]

It occurs to me, MoO, that if we apply this standard to the average American citizen we run into a problem. In many cases, they're suing over an issue like this because they need the money to live. What happens if someone suffers an injury like Ben's friend due to someone else's negligence? What if, in theory, they could have sought treatment immediately and been fine, but don't realize how badly they've been injured and the problem becomes crippling?

What should they do?

Uh... how about see a doctor when they start suffering excruciating pain? How is this an unreasonably high standard to place upon people in society? The law is meant to influence people to take socially beneficial actions; ignoring injuries to the point where their treatment increases the total social costs of treatment and then rewarding them for doing so is not socially beneficial.

Indeed, no matter how much the person "need the money to live" (a concept which I find highly questionable in any case--particularly when the person can wait years before filing the suit at all), damages are still limited by foreseeability. It is highly questionable as to whether a cafeteria could foresee (e.g.) a bad reaction to an antibiotic prescribed to fight an infection that had been caused by someone who damaged a tooth by biting into an unpitted olive, requiring additional surgical intervention.

Put another way, there are people who suffer injury without it being their fault at all, but who nonetheless cannot legally recover for their injuries (perhaps because their injury is no one's fault or because a tortfeasor is judgment proof or for another reason entirely). Perhaps those people need the money to live, but they nonetheless go unrecompensed for the harms afflicting them. Why should Kucinich be placed into a different category? Why should the cafeteria be forced to pay for damages which were likely not even foreseeable for injuring someone completely unintentionally, and why should Kucinich be one of the lucky ones who receives payment for his unforeseeable injuries when other people are lumped into the category of not receiving legal compensation for their suffering?