Nissan 370Z Forum
Page 7 of 11 « First 56 7 89 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Nissan 370Z Forum (http://www.the370z.com/)
-   Nissan 370Z General Discussions (http://www.the370z.com/nissan-370z-general-discussions/)
-   -   How is there not a class action against Nissan yet? Anyone want to step up? (http://www.the370z.com/nissan-370z-general-discussions/35386-how-there-not-class-action-against-nissan-yet-anyone-want-step-up.html)

GZ3 04-26-2011 12:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadoquad (Post 1074836)
I hope that suit goes down in flames. Happy Meals are marketing, but is McD's alone in this? And so what if they are? If kids say they want McDonald's for food, the adult of the household can still say "no". You know, the adult, the legally responsible one? That party can dictate what the minors eat, after all it is their job.
i used to buy cereal all the time because of the toys that came inside when i was little, or i made my parents buy it lol

lets go ahead and sue them too! :facepalm:

KillerBee370 04-26-2011 12:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by semtex (Post 1074818)
I think KillerBee is pointing out that in order to have a cause of action, one must show that s/he has either actually suffered damage (i.e., some sort of loss), or that a contract has been breached.
Didn't I say that? Add: A lot of people have to be able to show that same hence the "class" action.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kielbasa16 (Post 1074832)
Well the new one (not sure how new) McDonalds is facing is a claim that they should not have toys in their Happy Meals. I dont have all the facts, but the basic premise is that because the Happy Meal has toys that appeal to children, it forces parents to buy their kids the food.
:bowrofl: I wonder if I gave out a cheap little plastic toy for every blowjob recieved, little Timmy would "force" his mommy to come over more often?

shadoquad 04-26-2011 12:49 PM
http://cache.ohinternet.com/images/9/9e/Arguecat.PNG

b1adesofcha0s 04-26-2011 12:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadoquad (Post 1074836)
I hope that suit goes down in flames. Happy Meals are marketing, but is McD's alone in this? And so what if they are? If kids say they want McDonald's for food, the adult of the household can still say "no". You know, the adult, the legally responsible one? That party can dictate what the minors eat, after all it is their job.
Or just get the toy without the food. I'm sure they wouldn't have a problem with giving/selling it to someone, especially if you just pay the $3-4 happy meal cost and just ask for the toy. Probably cheaper than buying a normal toy.

happytheman 04-26-2011 12:51 PM
http://lolpics.se/pics/482.jpg

KillerBee370 04-26-2011 12:51 PM
sh!t I would probably get sued!!!! Forget it!!! :roflpuke2:

dad 04-26-2011 12:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by semtex (Post 1074818)
I think KillerBee is pointing out that in order to have a cause of action, one must show that s/he has either actually suffered damage (i.e., some sort of loss), or that a contract has been breached.
Hey semtex, how you doing?
Owners of the 350Z had a class action law suit.
Google

KillerBee370 04-26-2011 12:52 PM
I'm LOVING the tags on this thread :bowrofl:

semtex 04-26-2011 12:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBee370 (Post 1074854)
I'm LOVING the tags on this thread :bowrofl:
I added my contribution.

KillerBee370 04-26-2011 12:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dad (Post 1074851)
Hey semtex, how you doing?
Owners of the 350Z had a class action law suit.
Google
Thank god we drive a 370! lol

That lawsuit = possible "injury" in that people are being forced to spend money in a way that doesn't constitute "normal" spending over a certain period. Has a judge entertained this one yet?

KillerBee370 04-26-2011 12:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by semtex (Post 1074858)
I added my contribution.
me too :tup:

dad 04-26-2011 01:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBee370 (Post 1074859)
Thank god we drive a 370! lol

That lawsuit = possible "injury" in that people are being forced to spend money in a way that doesn't constitute "normal" spending over a certain period. Has a judge entertained this one yet?
"Injury", your just misusing words.

semtex 04-26-2011 01:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dad (Post 1074873)
"Injury", your just misusing words.
How so?

Waiz 04-26-2011 01:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerBee370 (Post 1074854)
I'm LOVING the tags on this thread :bowrofl:
I added my toll-free line to facilitate the lawsuit :icon17:

KillerBee370 04-26-2011 01:19 PM
injury

n. any harm done to a person by the acts or omissions of another. Injury may include physical hurt as well as damage to reputation or dignity, loss of a legal right or breach of contract. If the party causing the injury was either willful (intentionally causing harm) or negligent then he/she is responsible (liable) for payment of damages for the harm caused. Theoretically, potential or continuing injury may be prevented by an order of the court upon a petition for an injunction.

See also: damages injunction injunctive relief negligence


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:47 PM.
Page 7 of 11 « First 56 7 89 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2