Shopper awarded $90,000 damages after slipping on grape

[BananaHandsB]

I find it disturbing that people, individuals would rather side with some faceless conglomerate against other people. Solidarity with a business. Its bizarre.

Interjecting bias regarding corporations and individuals should not effect one's judgement of the law. The facts are all that should matter. I find using this bias to "side" with an argument just as disturbing.

[Mehrunes]

Wait, I'm endorsing communism because I believe people should be aware of their surroundings (dimly lit, 20,000-ish square foot store, without power, aware that we are escorting customers as we are available, and a stench from food thawing out, right after a hurricane and nobody in a 50-mile radius has power)?

Yeesh. Your world is scarier than mine.

Well, I was in the same world as you. But then I read the contributions of the hero we don't need, but the one we deserve and his kin in this thread and I've seen the light.

[Super Friendly Kitty Cat]

Holy shit.

I actually agree with Wells and Themius on this issue.

[Seditian]

I honestly just assumed it was an ~incident~ in the US but after reading the first page... lmao.

[Ayla]

Interesting case. Imo expecting a supermarket to be able to immediately clean up every single grape that falls to the floor (among all the other food in the supermarket) is as "unreasonable" an expectation as it is for Ms. Guru to be constantly watching the floor, as the judge claims. For all we know that grape could have fallen 2 seconds before Ms. Guru slipped on it..

Judges love to award money, despite what's considered reasonable

https://www.google.ca/amp/www.dailym...roid-rogers-ca

I know it's daily fail, but it really did happen

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

He's quite correct. Why would a business invest in training/safety equipment/procedures etc if the cost of paying out damages was considerably cheaper?

$90k is a fart in a whirlwind to Coles.

How is that really the same as someone (possibly a non-employee) dropping a grape and then second later, a random person (somehow) slips on it? Its not as if they had a leaky faucet leaking for over a year and someone slipped.

[Captain N]

Judges love to award money, despite what's considered reasonable

https://www.google.ca/amp/www.dailym...roid-rogers-ca

I know it's daily fail, but it really did happen

Well to be honest all the lawyer of that woman wanted was $12,000 to cover the medical bills, and Target pretty much slapped him in the face by countering with a $750 offer. A hypodermic needle in a parking lot is a serious bio hazard and could have done some serious life-long damage.

Target kind of fucked themselves on this one.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

If I were the judge, I would have ruled against her, the moment she started trolling with requests like 1 million dollars.

It's just a money grab.

Agreed... if she just wanted medical expenses I would be less skeptical.

[Azadina]

Well to be honest all the lawyer of that woman wanted was $12,000 to cover the medical bills, and Target pretty much slapped him in the face by countering with a $750 offer. A hypodermic needle in a parking lot is a serious bio hazard and could have done some serious life-long damage.

Target kind of fucked themselves on this one.

The award sum is still entirely ridiculous. Wouldn't you be happy if you were granted 2 or 3 times what you reasonably asked? Why did it have to be 383 times that?

[Ayla]

Well to be honest all the lawyer of that woman wanted was $12,000 to cover the medical bills, and Target pretty much slapped him in the face by countering with a $750 offer. A hypodermic needle in a parking lot is a serious bio hazard and could have done some serious life-long damage.

Target kind of fucked themselves on this one.

Oh I agree for sure. 12000 was incredibly reasonible. However, what isn't reasonible is for employees to continously scan a parking lot and/or deal with biomedical waste at a given moment. But to the tune of 4.6 million shows how vindictive judges can rule. There are areas of Texas that award large sums of insurance money for minor car accidents, specifically against canadians.

[Captain N]

The award sum is still entirely ridiculous. Wouldn't you be happy if you were granted 2 or 3 times what you reasonably asked? Why did it have to be 383 times that?

That's the award the jury found to be sufficient due to Target's dismissal of the initial $12,000 request. Like I said Target fucked themselves on this one.

Court documents show that Garrison’s attorney offered to halt the case in February 2015 if Target Corp. agreed to a $12,000 judgment against the corporation. That same month, the company offered Garrison $750.

In court documents seeking summary judgment before the trial, Target’s lawyer, Knox Haynsworth III, argued that Garrison could not prove her case.

“When we started this, we were just trying to get Target to make my client whole, to pay for her medical bills and the time that her husband had to take off work,” said Garrison's attorney, Joshua Hawkins of Greenville. “We tried to be reasonable and not take this to trial. But Target took a really hard stance on it ... and I think the jury sent a message.”

http://www.independentmail.com/story...suit/90129402/

Seems more like that jury decided to take a shot at Target for initially claiming that Garrison was making the whole thing up. Kind of like what some posters are doing here with the woman who slipped on the grape.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

Oh I agree for sure. 12000 was incredibly reasonible. However, what isn't reasonible is for employees to continously scan a parking lot and/or deal with biomedical waste at a given moment. But to the tune of 4.6 million shows how vindictive judges can rule. There are areas of Texas that award large sums of insurance money for minor car accidents, specifically against canadians.

Yeah I don't see how thats practical for the business. That needle could have been dropped within 10 minutes of that lady falling on it. If the court had found gross negligence on account of Target never, ever cleaning their property... thats a different story.

And thats what is ridiculous about the grape story. How long were those grapes on the floor? 15 minutes max?

[Azadina]

That's the award the jury found to be sufficient due to Target's dismissal of the initial $12,000 request. Like I said Target fucked themselves on this one.

Court documents show that Garrison’s attorney offered to halt the case in February 2015 if Target Corp. agreed to a $12,000 judgment against the corporation. That same month, the company offered Garrison $750.

In court documents seeking summary judgment before the trial, Target’s lawyer, Knox Haynsworth III, argued that Garrison could not prove her case.

“When we started this, we were just trying to get Target to make my client whole, to pay for her medical bills and the time that her husband had to take off work,” said Garrison's attorney, Joshua Hawkins of Greenville. “We tried to be reasonable and not take this to trial. But Target took a really hard stance on it ... and I think the jury sent a message.”

http://www.independentmail.com/story...suit/90129402/

Seems more like that jury decided to take a shot at Target for initially claiming that Garrison was making the whole thing up. Kind of like what some posters are doing here with the woman who slipped on the grape.

The difference being that the lady in the story of this thread didn't even attempt to be reasonable. I still don't understand if it's governmental punishment aimed at business, then why are the millions showered towards the victims? Give them a fair compensation, but why toss more money at them than they would have made in their lifetime, for relatively minor injury even?

[Captain N]

The difference being that the lady in the story of this thread didn't even attempt to be reasonable. I still don't understand if it's governmental punishment aimed at business, then why are the millions showered towards the victims? Give them a fair compensation, but why toss more money at them than they would have made in their lifetime, for relatively minor injury even?

In this situation it was driving a point across. The woman attempted to be reasonable and was met with virtually being called a liar and offered a mere $750 for something that could have been extremely serious.

[rayden54]

If civil suits don't hurt then negligence becomes an acceptable cost of business.

Which is why we get the story of the McDonald's coffee lawsuit. Same McDonalds ignored a smaller suit, so the judges increased the amount.

Regardless, without knowing the extent of her injuries, we've got no idea if this is excessive or not. A life flight alone can cost 15,000+.

[Azadina]

In this situation it was driving a point across. The woman attempted to be reasonable and was met with virtually being called a liar and offered a mere $750 for something that could have been extremely serious.

I think my point is, that if the government decides to heavily punish a business, then the government should take the money. After a reasonable compensation to the victims. But throwing 4.6m towards someone for no real reason from their part on why they should have that much, is absurd.

No wonder people try to scam the system.

[Reklia]

If grapes came like that I'd buy some

[Glorious Leader]

Interjecting bias regarding corporations and individuals should not effect one's judgement of the law. The facts are all that should matter. I find using this bias to "side" with an argument just as disturbing.

That makes no sense. As a matter of law she was awarded the damages so it's clearly been settled already. Now you can disagree with the law but that just puts you on the side of some faceless conglomerate trying to save a buck at the expense of actual people. The "fact" is she was awarded the damages already. Anything beyond that is an obvious bias. It makes no sense for that bias to be in favor of some large national or multinational firm unless your an investor of course.

[ComputerNerd]

Here in Denmark, you can get up to 190DKK (25ish Euro) per day up to a total of 73.500DKK (just under 10.000 Euro) after a year..

It's impossible to get more, unless you suffer permanent damage..

Bonus info: We have no laws, forcing yellow (or any other color) signs etc... People are going expected to look out for themselves..

That works perhaps on visible hazards under conditions which aid their visibility, and with customers who have good eyesight.
As myself being someone with poor distance vision I have enough trouble reading even warning signs meant to be visible when they are at a sufficient distance.

I only think the grape was making a break for freedom.
Something that we could make a move about.
The Grape Escape.

[cuafpr]

musta been a bad lawyer to get 90k, easy 500k in the states.