Nutty California judge awards 1.6M over 2x4s not being 2" by 4"

Page 1 of 5  
<http://www.prosalesmagazine.com/news/calif-judge-orders-lowes-pay-16m-civil-settlement_o?utm_source=newsletter&utm_content=jump&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=PSBU090514&day 14-09-05>
http://tinyurl.com/ph53fxp
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, September 16, 2014 11:43:09 AM UTC-4, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

And then when I tell people what a loony hell hole the libs have made of California, some people tell me it just ain't so. This is a good example. Great way for govt to protect the consumer. Assuming that judgement stands, it's the consumer that is going to pay it through higher prices. The dopey DA that brought this case probably never bought a 2x4 in his life. Another fine example of govt running amok.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/16/2014 10:59 AM, trader_4 wrote:

That particular judge was appointed by Arrrrnold and has an (R) by his name.
http://judgepedia.org/Paul_M._Haakenson
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/16/2014 6:46 PM, gonjah wrote:

[snip]

And the (R) obviously stands for RETARDED?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/16/2014 6:48 PM, Unquestionably Confused wrote:

Well...He is a republican.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

Wait until these guys visit a hamburger shop and discover that a "quarter pounder" is the weight before it is cooked. More lawsuits I suspect.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/16/2014 9:31 AM, Ken wrote:

I did notice that Home Depot is now putting the actual dimensions on the signs for each wood product.
It's okay to call it an 8' 2x4 but you can't call it 8' x 2" x 4" because it's not.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

this is especially true of the new dimensions for sheets of plywood: 1/2 inch plywood is now 7/16ths and each side is 1/16th shorter. be fun for roofers

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 09/16/2014 12:20 PM, Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote: ...

...
For construction ply the thickness is a 32nd under (not 16th) for 1/2" and up nominal thicknesses, but for sheathing the length dimensions are 1/8" shy w/ tolerance +0/-1/16 on that...GP spec's for sheathing are at--
<http://www.buildgp.com/DocumentViewer.aspx?elementid 378>
Hardwood ply is more variable in being often metric vis a vis English units and thicknesses as isn't subject to needing to meet building codes on strength, etc., that keeps bounds on how far they can trim stuff on construction grades.
--


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, September 16, 2014 1:20:59 PM UTC-4, Malcom Mal Reynolds wrote:

1/2" is not 7/16", it's 15/32, 3/4 is 23/32, etc. I just replaced some roof sheathing and the 1/32 difference doesn't matter. If someone didn't tell you, you'd never know it. Also IDK if the 1/16th shorter is true, but for roofing that doesn't matter either. There is supposed to be some space between adjacent sheets.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 09/16/2014 1:59 PM, trader_4 wrote: ...

Which is a reason for sheathing and other construction panels to be short length/width. The thickness is purely cost-savings to the fabricator--over enough sheets that difference makes up a lot of raw material...
The thickness _does_ matter when it comes to matching up with trim lumber and the like, however. It's a pita when the joint is proud by that difference. But, for sheathing/subflooring/etc., it is pretty much immaterial other than for total thickness for leveling floor transitions, etc.
--



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 10:12:37 -0700 (PDT), trader_4

This was a settlement. There will not be an appeal.
I think we are just going to see another sign. "trade size, actual size is "X") You might even see Lowes listing these in metric. (which most lumber is these days) That would also get away from that x/32ds plywood which is also metric.
I agree, they should have taken this to an appeals court but that costs a lot of money. I suspect this will prompt more suits and I doubt rational courts would agree with this insanity.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, September 16, 2014 1:29:33 PM UTC-4, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

It's not clear from the article exactly what it was. It says it was a settlement handed down by a judge. That could mean that it was a negotiated settlement, and the judge agreed to it. Or it could mean that the judge settled the matter by handing down that judgement in favor of the state. If it was actually a negotiated settlement, usually they make that clear by saying the parties agreed to it. And if that's what was, then they can't appeal.
Here's another twist on it. One of the DA's involved said that it would not have been a violation if what Lowes was selling actually conformed to the NIST standards for a 2x4. He says what they were selling was actually smaller than that and then if you call it a 2x4, but don't disclose the actual dimensions, it's illegal.
http://www.remodeling.hw.net/business/district-attorney-oks-nominal-lumber-descriptions_o
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Only a clueless judge would make such a ruling.
Sometimes I think it takes a generous amount of stupidity to lubricate the operation of the legal system.
--
nestork

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Where else but California...nutty judge, nutty prosecutor, nutty weights and measures know nothing employee.
I hope Lowes appeals it.
--

dadiOH
____________________________
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 09/16/2014 1:29 PM, dadiOH wrote: ...

One would have wished but Lowes (for the third time in last year or so) just rolled over and took a settlement instead of vigorously fighting.
--



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

In Spanish too, of course.
--

dadiOH
____________________________
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/16/2014 11:43 AM, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

Twenty years ago a judge gave a commencement speech at my son's college graduation and talked about the problem of dumbing down America. She was right.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/16/2014 11:43 AM, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

Then you must have heard about the time a contractor sent his brother in to buy 4X2's and the clerk told him that he meant, 2X4's. Guy said he'd ask his brother and came back and said the clerk was right.
Clerk asked guy how long he wanted them and guy said he'd ask his brother.
Came back and said brother said he wanted them a long time, he was gonna build a house.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

<http://www.prosalesmagazine.com/news/calif-judge-orders-lowes-pay-16m-ci vil-settlement_o?utm_source=newsletter&utm_content=jump&utm_mediumemail&utm_campaign=PSBU090514&day 14-09-05>

Or try on a pair of Size 9 shoes.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.