Username:
Password:

Register Forgot password?

Login to Vote!

CLAIMANT ALLEGES EXTREMELY HOT TEA AT DRIVE THROUGH KILLED HER DOG

VN:R_U [1.9.1_1087]
+1 (1 vote)

A Colorado woman filed a lawsuit against a popular coffee chain for an improperly served cup of hot tea, which spilled and severely burned both her and her dog. According to a complaint she is seeking over $75,000 in damages.

She alleges she did not state that she wanted her tea “extra hot,” but it was served “unreasonably hot” anyway—with an insecure lid, in a single cup, without a hot-cup sleeve”. Once the Plaintiff received the cup of tea into her hands, the hot temperature of the cup began to burn her hands”. “Hot tea began to spill out of the cup through the unsecured lid and onto Plaintiff’s body. The tea caused Plaintiff’s clothing to melt. The tea caused severe burns to Plaintiff. Plaintiff immediately experienced intense pain including on her stomach, legs, and lap.”

Her scream and crying led her dog to jump onto her lap, at which point he was burned by the tea. Though he was taken to an emergency veterinarian, he died shortly after from his injuries. The claimant was treated for her severe burns at the hospital and had to get skin-graft surgery for “2% total body surface area second-degree burn injury to the abdomen and bilateral thighs,” she also alleges the incident left her with permanent scarring, loss of feeling, and emotional distress.

Leave a Comment

Login to Vote!

PIZZA TEXTING MAY RESULT IN A SETTLEMENT

VN:R_U [1.9.1_1087]
0 (0 votes)

A California Man is taking a national pizza chain to court for texting him too many pizza offers via an automated marketing system. This case may be legally valid: Because the claimatn texted “STOP” to the robo-text system and the messages kept coming, the practice could be a violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

The court filing argued the texts cause Anozie “to suffer a significant amount of anxiety, frustration, and annoyance.” The case hasn’t been resolved, and the claimant is asking for $500 per text received.

Leave a Comment

Login to Vote!

MOTION TO QUASH A SUBPOENA

VN:R_U [1.9.1_1087]
0 (0 votes)

I work for a Legal Process Service Company for insurance defense clients. Today, I received a Motion to Quash a Subpoena. i scoured the document to figure out why it was being rejected.

I finally figured out instead of addressing the subpoena to “The State Compensation Insurance Fund” It had been addressed to ” The State Compensation Insurance FRAUD. I guess they don’t believe in typos. They could have called our office and advised of the typo. Instead their legal department went to the trouble of preparing a six page Motion to Quash the Subpoena. That is waste of tax payers money!!!!

Leave a Comment

Login to Vote!

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES IN AND OUT BURGER VERSUS SMASHBURGER

VN:R_U [1.9.1_1087]
+1 (1 vote)

Irvine-based In-N-Out Burger filed a trademark infringement lawsuit Monday, Aug. 28 against Denver-based Smashburger, claiming the fast food rival’s “Smashburger Triple Double” is too similar to its famed “Double Double” burger.
“Smashburger’s use of the Triple Double and Smashburger Triple Double marks is likely to confuse and mislead the consuming public, and injure In-N-Out, by causing consumers to believe incorrectly that Smashburger’s products originate from or are authorized by In-N-Out,” the lawsuit states.

The Southern California institution, whose large fan base is the envy of its rivals, said In-N-Out owns multiple trademarks for its various sandwiches. Some trademarks were obtained more than 40 years ago.

“Since at least as early as 1963, In-N-Out has continuously used its registered DOUBLE-DOUBLE trademark in connection with hamburger sandwiches in interstate commerce. Since at least as early as 1966, In-N-Out has continuously used its registered TRIPLE TRIPLE trademark in connection with hamburger sandwiches in interstate commerce,” the lawsuit stated.

Smashburger was founded in Denver in 2007. The chain has grown quickly, entering Orange County in 2012. It has three locations in Orange County. The better burger concept is known for using gourmet toppings such as goat cheese, truffle mayonnaise and mini portabella mushrooms.

Smashburger, like In-N-Out, also uses toasted and lightly buttered sponge-dough buns. Launched in mid-July, Smashburger’s Triple Double features two burger patties and three slices of cheese.

“This will be Smashburger’s new iconic menu item, providing three times the cheese and double the beef in every bite,” chain co-founder Tom Ryan said in a statement this summer.
The privately held In-N-Out has a reputation for fiercely protecting its brand from copycats. In the past, they have sued restaurants for using similar decor, uniforms and logos — which are all protected under the company’s trademark portfolio.

Written by Nancy Luna OC Register

Leave a Comment

Login to Vote!

We’ve Heard it All, Except this One

VN:R_U [1.9.1_1087]
0 (2 votes)

We see all sorts of claims at our rental car company, but this one was one of the craziest. A man rented an economy car (small) and there were significant scrapes to both sides of the car when he returned it. He claims he drove through a narrow alley and the car got stuck on the walls of the buildings. We are in Texas, not Europe. We didn’t believe the story, but he paid for the CLD and so the car was covered.

Leave a Comment

Login to Vote!

CRASH DURING JEOPARDY

VN:R_U [1.9.1_1087]
+2 (2 votes)

Our homeowner had just got home from work. She filled up a glass of wine and turned on her daily ritual of watching Jeopardy on television. She got excited and screamed out a difficult answer and at the same time a Dodge Ram truck crashed through her home. It barely missed hitting her. She was very shaken as she lives on a corner lot and this is the second time a car has crashed through her home. She was excited about living in a hotel while her home is being repaired but was nervous that we would cancel her policy since this is the second time this has happened.

The only thing I could tell her is the renewal was not in my control and since her renewal policy has only been in effect for one month she has Eleven months until renewal time.

Leave a Comment

Login to Vote!

DINNER PARTY GONE WRONG

VN:R_U [1.9.1_1087]
+2 (2 votes)

I received a homeowners claim for FOOD POISONING. Our homeowner had a dinner party for 16 guests and they all came down with food poisoning. Apparently she had gone to her grandmothers house and discovered wild mushrooms way out in the back of her one acre lot. She decided this would be a great item to add to her dinner part. Apparently, they were poison mushrooms and everyone that ate them was violently ill. The funny part of the claim is that they were all together in the Emergency Room at the same time and the party continued even if it was on a sour note. We will pay for the treatment up to the policy limits.

Leave a Comment

Login to Vote!

Eclipse Claim

VN:R_U [1.9.1_1087]
0 (2 votes)

We already received a claim regarding the solar eclipse. Our insured had purchased 30 pairs of solar eclipse “glasses” for resale. A man claims that the pair he purchased from our insured was broken and that he would either miss the rare event or damage his eyes. He sent a demand to our insured for $5,000. We’ve denied the claim. Claimant could have come back to the store and sought a replacement for the damaged pair or bought glasses somewhere else. Missing the eclipse would not have resulted in any financial loss as Claimant is not a scientist. He’s a used car salesman.

Leave a Comment

Monthly Contest

Enter to Win Crazy Gift Cards -- Up to $100.00! You would be Crazy not to submit your bizarro claims stories for the chance to win up to $100.00 in gift cards if your story is laugh out loud funniest, cringe-worthiest or craziest. Submit your Crazy claims today -- just make sure not to use any real names of people or companies. You could be a winner!

View Winners