Woman suing Wal Mart for racism

Guest said:
Justice and injustice in this context are not oppositional terms. Access to justice means the ability to pursue remedies through litigation. There is no inherent presupposition of right or wrong. It means that all people have the chance to get 'their day in court'.
Click to expand...

If there is nothing to remedy, there is no justice to seek.
 
CFM said:
If there is nothing to remedy, there is no justice to seek.
Click to expand...

Aggrieved parties feel differently. Again, in this context, "justice" does not assign "judgment" of the merit of a claim.

"Justice" as used means access to the judicial process, which is guaranteed to all.

If a claim is felt to be frivolous or vexatious, Defendant can ask the Court for relief and have their motion heard.

But Plaintiff has the right to file their complaint.
 
Guest said:
They most likely will settle. It's a cost of doing business, and it'll be passed on to the consumer like every other cost is.
Click to expand...

I called the corporate office and told them that I thought this should NOT be settle out of Court and instead should be publically fought and have this women and her lawyer exposed for the frauds they are.
I also told them that if they do settle this out of Court, that they then deserve every dumbass lawsuit that is filed at them; because it will just open the floodgates for more people being "offended".
 
Guest said:
Aggrieved parties feel differently. Again, in this context, "justice" does not assign "judgment" of the merit of a claim.

"Justice" as used means access to the judicial process, which is guaranteed to all.

If a claim is felt to be frivolous or vexatious, Defendant can ask the Court for relief and have their motion heard.

But Plaintiff has the right to file their complaint.
Click to expand...

How was she aggrieved? What was unfair about the items be locked up?
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
I called the corporate office and told them that I thought this should NOT be settle out of Court and instead should be publically fought and have this women and her lawyer exposed for the frauds they are.
I also told them that if they do settle this out of Court, that they then deserve every dumbass lawsuit that is filed at them; because it will just open the floodgates for more people being "offended".
Click to expand...

Really? Who did you speak with?
 
Guest said:
How's that?

I had nothing to do with establishing the legal guidelines for American civil litigation.
Click to expand...

You apparently have no problem with her abusing the legal system and filing frivolous lawsuits that take up the legal system's time that could be used to deal with legitimate claims. True cases have to wait longer because some entitlement minded black bitch didn't like a situation.
 
CFM said:
How was she aggrieved? What was unfair about the items be locked up?
Click to expand...

She has a grievance; therefore she is said to be "aggrieved".

She claims that only products intended to be purchased by black people were locked up. She says that proves that Walmart discriminates unfairly against black people.

As I said, tough to prove. I'm fairly confident that other products which are not generally associated with black people are also locked up.
 
Guest said:
She has a grievance; therefore she is said to be "aggrieved".

She claims that only products intended to be purchased by black people were locked up. She says that proves that Walmart discriminates unfairly against black people.

As I said, tough to prove. I'm fairly confident that other products which are not generally associated with black people are also locked up.
Click to expand...

If nothing wrong was done, she has no grievance.
 
CFM said:
You apparently have no problem with her abusing the legal system and filing frivolous lawsuits that take up the legal system's time that could be used to deal with legitimate claims. True cases have to wait longer because some entitlement minded black bitch didn't like a situation.
Click to expand...

That's the way it is, not the way I'd like it to be.

Only a judge has the power to decide which cases are frivolous or "true", BTW, and they have to be presented with a Motion for dismissal or Summary Judgment and hear arguments before they can rule. Either way, Defendant must answer the original complaint.

I have an idea: why don't you talk to your attorney and let him or her fill you in (and bill you for it)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top