Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 zombie_babies Sep 26, 2012 11:51:23	Link $73,000 table ruined.  Suit seeks $219,000 in damages.
#2 The_Silversword Sep 26, 2012 12:38:26	Well the company should pay for emotional damages, new glass table scuffed up with balls, oh the horror!
#3 Klirshon Sep 26, 2012 13:12:18	This isn't interesting math as this is an example of a plaintiff seeking treble damages. What is interesting is he thought his balls were adequate for a $73,000 glass table.
#4 zombie_babies Sep 26, 2012 13:39:46	I can't see him getting a dime anyway.  The warning was in the instruction packet.  I think it's a safe assumption for a company to make that people will read the instructions they supply.
#5 Klirshon Sep 26, 2012 14:35:30	While I concur that he shouldn't get anything from the defendant since the table came with instructions on proper ball usage, I do not consider it a safe assumption to expect people will read such instructions. People are stupid, that is why their kids eat those laundry detergent packets.
#6 zombie_babies Sep 26, 2012 14:41:06	Meh, it's a reasonable assumption to make.  Most people probably don't but they're stupid.  No company should be held responsible for the stupidity of the people that purchase their schtuff.
#7 Klirshon Sep 26, 2012 14:59:03	That is understandable.
#8 jetshield Sep 26, 2012 15:12:03	I wonder how much R&D money companies spend trying to stupidproof everything they sell.