Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Dr. Mehmet Oz is being sued for injures sustained by a New Jersey man. Was this person under Dr. Oz' care? Was he someone Dr. Oz had spoken with about a medical issue? Did Dr. Oz, in an uncharacteristic fit of anger, punch the Jersey guy?
Nope. This man is simply one of the millions of people who have watched Dr. Oz on TV over the years. So why is he suing? Because, the plaintiff claims, he was injured when he tried Dr. Oz' home sleep remedy known as the "Knapsack Heated Rice Footsie."
Shake your head in disbelief all you want, but this is far from the most ludicrous lawsuit we have seen in recent years.
Who can forget the Michigan woman who filed a lawsuit in 2011 against the producers of the film "Drive"? Her complaint alleged that she was misled by the movie's trailer which promised "Fast and the Furious" type driving, which, alas, the film didn't deliver.
And then there was the lawsuit filed last year against the Dallas Cowboys by a woman claiming she sustained burns on her legs. What did she say the Cowboys did wrong? She claims they failed to warn her that sitting for an extended period of time on a black bench outside the Cowboys' stadium on a hot August day could cause burns.
More? Well, while in Tennessee, a couple sued Steak 'n Shake after their son ingested a sauce labeled "Mega Death Hot Sauce." It should be noted that the sauce bottle bears the image of a skull engulfed in flames.
And that brings us to Dr. Oz. On his April 17, 2012, show, he offered advice about how to sleep better. One suggestion was filling the toe of a pair of socks with uncooked rice. The socks were then to be placed in the microwave and heated until warm. However, Dr. Oz expressly warned viewers, "Don't get it too hot, just warm."
The heated footsie was then to be worn for 20 minutes. The reasoning being that the heated socks will cause blood to be diverted to your feet, which in turn will cool the rest of your body. As Dr. Oz explained, "you're going to be able to sleep better because your body has to be cold in order to be sleepy."
However, the plaintiff claims that he suffered third degree burns from this remedy. How? Well, he apparently fell asleep with the socks on and didn't realize his feet had been burned until he woke up in the middle of night and tried to walk. The plaintiff also claims that Dr. Oz should have offered a specific warning to avoid using this remedy to people who, like him, have diabetes and hence less feeling in their feet.
Let's be honest: These above lawsuits are at best legally questionable and at worst frivolous. But don't blame the person seeking the money. Blame the lawyers.
Personal injury lawyers have enticed people for years with their TV commercials and ads on the walls of buses and trains telling us that if you have been wronged, you might be entitled to a big cash award or settlement. This is, of course, followed by the line: "We don't get paid unless you do."
So, understandably, people flock to these lawyers with complaints about every imaginable wrong seeking a payday. The lawyers then file lawsuits, hoping for a quick settlement so that they can do as little work as possible before seeing their own payday.
Full disclosure: When I practiced law, I represented corporations against lawsuits. Consequently, I'm a bit biased against plaintiffs' lawyers. But it's easy for even a non-corporate lawyer to see that these ridiculous lawsuits give the reputable plaintiffs' attorneys -- and, frankly, all lawyers -- a black eye.
It's not that I'm without sympathy for the growing number of lawyers out there struggling to make ends meet. The practice of law has grown increasingly competitive and challenging. I can understand the lure of taking a questionable case that will reap you some media coverage and money.
But that's not a good enough reason to do it. Lawyers need to collectively rein in these types of cases. If they don't, the government will do it for them under the guise of "tort reform." The new laws that result would in all likelihood make it harder to file a lawsuit and would limit damages in personal injury cases. And this will make it even more challenging for lawyers to earn a living. Worse, these reforms may prevent some truly injured people from receiving the full compensation they deserve because of caps on damages.
As for Dr. Oz, I hope that he doesn't settle quickly out of court. Instead, I hope they fully litigate this case. In all likelihood he will prevail. But even if the plaintiff does ultimately win, it still will have sent a clear message to plaintiffs' attorneys who take these legally questionable cases: If you want money, you are going to have to really earn it.
Then there are the "class action" lawsuits. Many lawyers dream of getting into one of these, because they can make millions, and the members of the "class" will get, with luck, $12 each or maybe a $20 coupon for something they can't use or don't need.
I have received several of those mailings over the last year or so. They all sound really good until you get to the awards for the members of the "class", and the compensation for the lawyers, then it all falls apart as far as I am concerned. I will not participate.
The problem is that we have far too mnay lawyers but witht heir politcv cal influence they can keep getttig to file suits that have no or little basis witout ahrm tot ehm for doig so. We definitely need tot reform as its gottewn too expansive for consumer to continue to pay for and they do.
Dr. Mehmet Oz is being sued for injures sustained by a New Jersey man. Was this person under Dr. Oz' care? Was he someone Dr. Oz had spoken with about a medical issue? Did Dr. Oz, in an uncharacteristic fit of anger, punch the Jersey guy?
Nope. This man is simply one of the millions of people who have watched Dr. Oz on TV over the years. So why is he suing? Because, the plaintiff claims, he was injured when he tried Dr. Oz' home sleep remedy known as the "Knapsack Heated Rice Footsie."
Shake your head in disbelief all you want, but this is far from the most ludicrous lawsuit we have seen in recent years.
Who can forget the Michigan woman who filed a lawsuit in 2011 against the producers of the film "Drive"? Her complaint alleged that she was misled by the movie's trailer which promised "Fast and the Furious" type driving, which, alas, the film didn't deliver.
And then there was the lawsuit filed last year against the Dallas Cowboys by a woman claiming she sustained burns on her legs. What did she say the Cowboys did wrong? She claims they failed to warn her that sitting for an extended period of time on a black bench outside the Cowboys' stadium on a hot August day could cause burns.
More? Well, while in Tennessee, a couple sued Steak 'n Shake after their son ingested a sauce labeled "Mega Death Hot Sauce." It should be noted that the sauce bottle bears the image of a skull engulfed in flames.
And that brings us to Dr. Oz. On his April 17, 2012, show, he offered advice about how to sleep better. One suggestion was filling the toe of a pair of socks with uncooked rice. The socks were then to be placed in the microwave and heated until warm. However, Dr. Oz expressly warned viewers, "Don't get it too hot, just warm."
The heated footsie was then to be worn for 20 minutes. The reasoning being that the heated socks will cause blood to be diverted to your feet, which in turn will cool the rest of your body. As Dr. Oz explained, "you're going to be able to sleep better because your body has to be cold in order to be sleepy."
However, the plaintiff claims that he suffered third degree burns from this remedy. How? Well, he apparently fell asleep with the socks on and didn't realize his feet had been burned until he woke up in the middle of night and tried to walk. The plaintiff also claims that Dr. Oz should have offered a specific warning to avoid using this remedy to people who, like him, have diabetes and hence less feeling in their feet.
Let's be honest: These above lawsuits are at best legally questionable and at worst frivolous. But don't blame the person seeking the money. Blame the lawyers.
Personal injury lawyers have enticed people for years with their TV commercials and ads on the walls of buses and trains telling us that if you have been wronged, you might be entitled to a big cash award or settlement. This is, of course, followed by the line: "We don't get paid unless you do."
So, understandably, people flock to these lawyers with complaints about every imaginable wrong seeking a payday. The lawyers then file lawsuits, hoping for a quick settlement so that they can do as little work as possible before seeing their own payday.
Full disclosure: When I practiced law, I represented corporations against lawsuits. Consequently, I'm a bit biased against plaintiffs' lawyers. But it's easy for even a non-corporate lawyer to see that these ridiculous lawsuits give the reputable plaintiffs' attorneys -- and, frankly, all lawyers -- a black eye.
It's not that I'm without sympathy for the growing number of lawyers out there struggling to make ends meet. The practice of law has grown increasingly competitive and challenging. I can understand the lure of taking a questionable case that will reap you some media coverage and money.
But that's not a good enough reason to do it. Lawyers need to collectively rein in these types of cases. If they don't, the government will do it for them under the guise of "tort reform." The new laws that result would in all likelihood make it harder to file a lawsuit and would limit damages in personal injury cases. And this will make it even more challenging for lawyers to earn a living. Worse, these reforms may prevent some truly injured people from receiving the full compensation they deserve because of caps on damages.
As for Dr. Oz, I hope that he doesn't settle quickly out of court. Instead, I hope they fully litigate this case. In all likelihood he will prevail. But even if the plaintiff does ultimately win, it still will have sent a clear message to plaintiffs' attorneys who take these legally questionable cases: If you want money, you are going to have to really earn it.
Eh, the Dr. Oz one I can get onboard with to an extent. He's a doctor, people trust his judgement as a professional in the field and whether you suggest someone does something via the TV to million or in a doctors office is the same in my eyes.
Ok, so people were going to bed right when they used this? It is supposed to make you sleep quicker/better? He goes into specific medical terms why it will?
You've positioned yourself in your program and in this specific advice as an expert and people are under the impression that this is trustworthy.
Is there a probability that someone trusting all these treatments, using them when they typically fall alseeps, its intended effect is to create better/faster sleep results in someone falling asleep with the socks on?
That is pretty obvious to me, if you have remember to wake up or not fall alseep after 20 minutes of laying horizontal with something aiding me in sleep only to remove it and disturb the intended effects, then its pretty stupid of Dr. Oz to recommend to millions of "patients".
Just at face value and reserving the right to consider more details and facts, I would consider him partially responsible for the NJ man's foot injuries.
Warm is also subjective to some extent. He should have given an actual temperature that is physically confirmed to not cause burn damage to human skin. That would have been much more intelligent, then even if the person leave the socks on all night they will not be burned because the heat would dissipate from the climax of putting them on without burns.
I disagree. We have too many lawyers in this country and they couldn't find work doing proper lawyering, so they hung up shingles and started suing people in order to support themselves. They created this game. Let's hate both the players and the game.
If we weren't pumping out so many lawyers, we'd see a lot less of this.
If I had anything to say about it, I'd close the bottom 50% of law schools immediately. Overnight.
The firm I retired from was spending $300 million a year on 'practice protection'. Most lawyers simply assumed that if they filed a law suit against us then we would look to settle. And for years they were right. It was easy money for them and, for us, simply a cost of doing business which we passed on to our customers.
Because somebody pays for all these law suits and it is usually then end customer. You and me.
Then we got a new head of OGC (Office of General Counsel). He changed the tactic and started going to trial unless there was a strong case against us. We started winning cases and the word got out amongst the lawyers that we were no longer a soft touch. And our practice protection costs started falling dramatically.
One case I remember well ... a lawyer filed a $200 million suit against us. Two weeks before it was due to go to trial they called up and offered to settle for $20,000.
There are plenty of sleazy lawyers out there. But if corporations and legal insurance companies continue to settle even when they have a strong case then they are just encouraging them and the frivolous law suits will continue to happen.
There are plenty of sleazy lawyers out there. But if corporations and legal insurance companies continue to settle even when they have a strong case then they are just encouraging them and the frivolous law suits will continue to happen.
What can you do? Look at the bottom line. $20k to settle or $200k to defend?
That's the lottery they play.
What should happen is there be reasonable criteria to even FILE the suit.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
