Wal-Mart fights back

[keith]

Wrong.

...and your point is?

[yetanothermickey]

In house legal staff dramaticaly lowers the costs of this sort of thing. A non-lawyer paralegal secretary does 99% of the work. Things like slip& fall cases are so routine, the paperwork and filings are mostly boilerplate. The paralegal asks the supervisor, "should we use defense #a3c on this, or #ac7?

Meanwhile the plaintiff, who is of MUCH more limited means must hire a lawyer at retail.

The corporation lawyers often use that as the only leverage needed to make a case go away. They simply keep delaying progress in the case by filing extensions, which cost them relatively nothing, while it makes the plaintiff run out of money to pay THEIR lawyer. A case can be strung along for YEARS this way.

[JoeSpareBedroom]

Meanwhile (at Wal Mart), they're spending most of their time doing their real job: Handling boring stuff like real estate acquisitions, leasing (to other retailers on the properties where WM is the anchor store), etc.

[Stormin Mormon]

As I remember, when California registered assault weapons. They set up registration stations all over, and only got one or two registrations that day. I expect the same in Chicago.

[keith]

Ah, I see. Out-house legal staffs aren't allowed to use paralegals.

You mean, like the US government? ...which BTW, is the subject here.

Another one who thinks employees are free.

[JoeSpareBedroom]

Ah, I see. Out-house legal staffs aren't allowed to use paralegals.

You mean, like the US government? ...which BTW, is the subject here.

Another one who thinks employees are free. ==============

He did not even remotely imply that employees are free. Not even if you squint and wish really hard.

Would it help if we just said "OK, you win."?

[Harry K]

And the frivolous and/or fraudulant claims will keep being filed until such time as the losing side has to pay the legal fees of the winners. Now it is a gold mine for sleaze lawyers. File any lawsuit and they have nothing to lose. Lose the case? Big deal, they are out some billable hours. Win and you win big.

One of the biggest legal scams going is the 'class action suit' Only the lawyeers make out with the judgements, the plaintiffs get pittances.

Harry K

[yetanothermickey]

They can, and do, however they can also bill the paralegal's time at the same rate as the rate of the lawyer whose name is on the file. The plaintaiff pays that inflated amount.

What costs Walmart $20-$30 an hour, costs the plaintiff $400 an hour.

[RickH]

That should lower the crime rate, right now with firearms being banned the gang bangers know the citizens are defenseless.

[RickH]

Actually law abiding FOID holders will be thankful that firearms are no longer illegal and will welcome the change regardless of the fees and having to go to the burbs to make a purchase.

[JoeSpareBedroom]

Hopefully, you consider your post to be an opinion and not an authoritative prediction.

[Percival P. Cassidy]

No, the crims know that there will be more firearms around for them to steal and use in worse crimes than theft.

Perce

[RickH]

Chicago is already highest crime in country (maybe world) with having all firearms be illegal, so your logic of (more guns =3D more crime) does not hold. If anything the current ban is proof that (no guns in the hands of responsible people =3D rampant crime).

[keith]

It's proof that not having guns in the hands of responsible people doesn't mean that guns aren't going to be used in crime, anyway. Looser gun laws =3D> lower crime. Tighter gun permitting =3D> more crime.

[Ed Pawlowski]

"Harry K" wrote

And the frivolous and/or fraudulant claims will keep being filed until such time as the losing side has to pay the legal fees of the winners. Now it is a gold mine for sleaze lawyers.

*********************************************

That is sometimes done for divorce, support type cases. Varies by state.

[Larry]

By this response, you clearly didn't read the article _YOU_ posted. I suggest you read it. Short version: It's about a clerk at one of their stores.

OSHA becomes involved because, oh what the heck, you _should_ know. HINT: The "O" stands for occupational.

[George]

In case you haven't noticed "heybub" is a gadfly. He/she is just interested in stirring things up not making sense out of anything.

[HeyBub]

In order to steal a firearm, the gun has to exist and the burglar has to break into the house to obtain it.

What are the chances of someone being home who's willing to operate the firearm during the break-in? That's the calculation the goblin has to make.

Fortunately, that tabulation has already been done. In an exhaustive study of all 3,050 counties in the country, it was discovered that crimes against persons went DOWN after firearms, specifically concealed carry, was enabled.

Conversely, crimes against property (stolen cars, etc.) went up slightly as the smarter criminals gravitated to less lethal endeavors.

Further, if the past is prologue, more guns in the hands of squints and mopes is a Good Thing (tm). In Chicago, for example, 95% of the gun homicide victims needed killin' anyway. Heck, even some of the shooters were caught! So, at least one gomer is no longer preying on society, and sometimes two!

Regrettably, some innocents fall victim during these shoot-outs. But, as we say in home repair, you can't build a house without making sawdust - there's always some waste.

[HeyBub]

You're absolutely right. I completely misremembered. Thank you for pointing out my error.

I have no problem with OSHA being involved. I have no problem with the agency promulgating rules to prevent this from happening again.

But, in my view, it is unconscionable for OSHA to fine Wal-Mart for violating a regulation that wasn't in force when the incident occurred.

I have to go shopping for a card.

[Larry]

Any time there is a fatality within the work place, OSHA becomes involved.

Unfortunately, you're correct, common sense by management in the work place will never be a regulation. Geez, if you have thousands of people waiting for the doors to open, who needs any type of crowd control, when you have a minimum wage worker told to open the doors. Management should set the example, and have the CEO open them, without any type of crowd control support.