Jan 13

Ten Lawsuits That Make You Shake Your Head From 2012

Check out some of the Frivolous lawsuits that have occurred over the past year!!

A lawsuit by a driver who pleaded guilty to driving under the influence of alcohol and drugs and then sued a victim that he killed tops the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform’s (ILR) survey of the Top Ten Most Ridiculous Lawsuits of 2012.

“Abuse of our legal system is no joke, and these examples range from the outrageous to the absurd,” said ILR President Lisa A. Rickard. “This poll reminds us that as a society, we sue too much. In turn, these abusive lawsuits inflict harm on lives, jobs, and our economic growth.”

ILR announced the Top Ten Most Ridiculous Lawsuits of 2012 from votes cast throughout the year by visitors to FacesOfLawsuitAbuse.org. The lawsuits were selected from those featured in the website’s monthly polls for 2012. The Faces of Lawsuit Abuse campaign is ILR’s public awareness effort created to highlight the impact of abusive lawsuits on small businesses, communities, and individuals.

The Top Ten Most Ridiculous Lawsuits of 2012 are:

1.   Intoxicated Florida driver pleads guilty to manslaughter, then sues victim he killed.


2.  Michigan woman files $5 million suit for the leftover gas still in her repossessed car.


3.  13-year-old Little Leaguer sued by spectator who got hit with baseball.


4.  Maximum security inmate who went to jail with five teeth sues prison for dental problems.

5.  Anheuser Busch sued when longneck bottle used as weapon in bar fight.

6.  National Football League fan sues Dallas Cowboys over hot bench.

7.  California restaurateur sued for disabilities act violations in parking lot he doesn’t own.

8.  Colorado man wins $7 million blaming illness on inhaling microwave popcorn fumes.

9.  $1.7 billion suit claims City of Santa Monica wireless parking meters causing health problems.

10. Bay Area parents sue school after their son was kicked out of honors class for cheating.

Jason Bentley



Oct 12

Insurers Shifting Roofing Policies In Tennessee

Tennessee regulators observed that in recent months, some property/casualty insurers in the state have filed to expand or shift their roofing policy terms to include actual cash value policies. As a result, Tennessee’s Department of Commerce and Insurance is reaching out to consumers to help them understand the difference in coverage.

Regulators explained that:

1. Actual cash value (ACV) policies pay consumers for replacement costs minus any applicable depreciation. Depreciation can be thought of as “wear and tear” or age.

2. Replacement cost policies pay consumers for what the damaged/destroyed item or structure would cost in today’s dollars. These policies do not account for any wear and tear or for the age of the item.

Regulators stated that replacement cost benefits will generally pay more for a claim than will ACV benefits. However, not all dwellings/items will qualify for full replacement benefits – determinations may be made on a situation-by-situation basis as companies inspect properties to resolve coverages they may make available based on the property’s condition and the company’s underwriting guidelines.

For example, regulators asked consumers to consider a hypothetical, $10,000 roof that is now five years old. When assuming that the roof needs to be replaced entirely and the homeowner has a $1,000 policy deductible:

• Under an ACV policy, the insurance company may determine that $500 of wear and tear/depreciation occurred each year since the roof was installed. At the time of the claim, the company would pay $6,500. Depreciation would have reduced the payment by $2,500 (5 years multiplied by $500 wear and tear per year) and the $1,000 deductible would also reduce the payment. The consumer would choose between making up the difference to pay for a roof of similar quality, or using the money to install a roof available at that price.

• Under a replacement cost policy, the insurance company would pay the amount required to replace the roof with similar-quality materials at today’s cost, minus the deductible. In the event that the same roof costs $11,000 at the time of the claim, the company would pay $10,000-$11,000 for the replacement roof, minus the $1,000 deductible. (Note: Insurance companies may initially pay the actual cash value for the roof, $6,500 and then reimburse the difference following submission of a receipt.)

This could be an issue in North Carolina  as well over the next decade.  The cost spent to replace a roof in North Carolina is comparable to that of Tennessee.

Jason Bentley



Oct 12

North Carolina Couple In Mecklenburg County Awarded $1.7 Million In Unborn Child’s Death

For those in the area that have not heard about this.

A jury has awarded a Charlotte, N.C., couple $1.7 million in a lawsuit against a local restaurant in connection with a head-on collision that killed the couple’s unborn son.

Attorneys for Matt and Meredith Eastridge say 25-year-old David Canter Huffman was speeding in his Volvo on Oct. 29, 2010, when the car crossed the center line and hit Matt Eastridge’s Toyota RAV4.

Police say Huffman died in the crash, as did the Eastridges’ unborn son. Meredith Eastridge was a front-seat passenger and was six months pregnant. The attorneys say Huffman had been drinking at Eddie’s Place, and that his blood alcohol content was nearly three times the legal limit.

This just proves that as a restaurant owner that sells alcohol should be more cautious when serving patrons.  It’s a slippery slope that can’t end well for any parties involved.

Jason Bentley