Wal-Mart fights back

Page 1 of 7  

"The feds are complaining about getting dragged into court, having to file time-consuming paperwork, and generally being treated like any taxpayer who get crosswise with the IRS. "
"The federal agency claims its precious time is being eaten up by Wal-Mart's legal maneuvers. Officials at the Department of Labor say that, over the past five months, 17 percent of the available attorney hours in its New York office have been devoted to this one little case..."
http://townhall.com/columnists/PaulGreenberg/2010/07/19/wal-mart_strikes_back/page/full
I understand that Wal-Mart will NEVER settle a meritless "slip-and-fall" case. They may lose money defending such a case but their theory is that a vigorous defense against a single nuisance suit deters 100 others.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Hey, when you've got more money than god. what's a few legal fees. I doubt they give a flying crap about other nuisance suits. It's just a simple exercise in power. They have more money than they can possible use, so what else can they do for chuckles. Howzabout flex some muscle and see who we can make flinch. Oooh... lookee!! The US government! Jinkies.
nb
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

What legal fees? They have salaried lawyers. Employees of the company, in other words.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Right. Employees are free. No salaries, no employment taxes, free. I wonder why 17% of the workers are un(der)employed?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Right. Employees are free. No salaries, no employment taxes, free. I wonder why 17% of the workers are un(der)employed?
========== I was about to respond with "You knew what I meant", but then I realized that you didn't, and explaining it would be pointless because of your condition.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The on-staff attorneys are a fixed cost. So they are only evaluating the variable (maybe marginal is the better term) costs of printing, couriers, etc. This is a whole lot different than most of us where the ALL of the costs of a suit are variable costs.
--
I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator
and name it after the IRS.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yeah, employees are sitting around waiting for something to do. They'd all have jobs if there were no suits.
Another moron heard from.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes, you got my point; you're a moron.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Yes, you got my point; you're a moron.
===============
Apparently, you didn't know that many companies have their own legal departments with attorneys on salary. You must be very young. You don't have much knowledge of the world yet.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I can definitely see Walmart's point. If they just settled, a lot more greedy people would "accidentally" fall and sue them to try to get rich-quick. This would cause prices to go up in order to cover these unnecessary lawsuits.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
rlz wrote:

did you read the article? it refers to a salesperson being trampled in the (i believe xmas sale) rush when they opened the doors. are you saying someone would throw themselves in front of a horde and want to get trampled on purpose?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I didn't interpret his message that way. But I wouldn't put it past someone to pretend they didn't see the large yellow WET FLOOR sign in the bathroom entrance and "slip & fall".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

What's the use of a WET FLOOR sign, when you need a sign which says, CUIDADO PISO MOJADO?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Just out of personal curiosity.. .were you by any chance toilet trained at gunpoint?
--
I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator
and name it after the IRS.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

What a strange question. Why do you ask? My statement about corporate legal departments was 100% accurate. It seems impossible to live more than maybe 3 decades without somehow becoming aware of that, even just through regular reading of a news source designed for grownups.
With that in mind, what's your problem with my comments? Be very specific.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

You prove your cluelessness with every post.

While your statement might be 100% correct, it's irrelevant. The *fact* is that employees aren't free, just as attorneys hired on retainer are not free. Litigation costs money no matter which sort of lawyers are used.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

================You prove your cluelessness with every post. ================
So, you think many companies DO NOT have their own legal departments with attorneys on salary?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/20/2010 2:07 PM, JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

You're missing the boat, Joe. Of course companies have legal departments. Do you think their lawyers are sitting around waiting for something to do? There is a ton of legal work to do in a big corporation. Lawsuits are generally extra costs and outside firms are hired for specific work in the local geographic area. Company I worked for was spending a million dollars a month extra just to fight law suits over a single product. Not a single case was lost but it still cost a million a month extra for several years.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message
While your statement might be 100% correct, it's irrelevant. The *fact* is that employees aren't free, just as attorneys hired on retainer are not free. Litigation costs money no matter which sort of lawyers are used.
============== You used the term "legal fees". Those are billed to a client by a law firm not connected with the client. You need to choose your words more carefully. 100% of educated people would agree that "legal fees" are entirely different from "salary".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Absolutely not... The only costs involved are the filing fees and the costs of any presentation materials and expert witnesses...
When in-house legal staff are busy with one case that means that any other cases would just take the remaining staffers longer to deal with until the "case of utmost importance" is resolved and those tasked with taking it on are free to deal with other matters...
What litigation would cost excessively more money, one in which your in-house counsel staff is inadequate to deal with either because of the legal area in dispute OR the amount of time it would take away from other legal matters and therefore hiring on outside attorneys at a great cost is required which costs money upfront which can be recouped in the damages awarded if you successfully prosecute your case and win...
~~ Evan
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

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.