HELP YOURSELF BEFORE TURNING TO COURTS

Published Sep. 21, 2006 in "The Oklahoma Daily
Viewable Online Here

A few days ago, a woman was attacked by a neighbor’s dog in Tampa, Fla. There’s nothing unusual about that, as attacks by vicious dogs are an unfortunately common occurrence.

The standout of this story is that the poor woman, instead of simply wilting under the force of the hundred-pound Rottweiler’s bites, fought back. She took matters into her own hands and actually bit the dog. And the dog immediately released her arm and retreated.

The amusing and heroic elements of this allegory also bring with them a somewhat symbolic element, with respect to the abuse of the legal system.

Our society seems to generate ever-increasing numbers of lawsuits. There’s nothing inherently wrong with lawsuits, because they are an integral part of the judicial system guaranteed by the Constitution.

America’s founding fathers knew that in any pluralistic nation, there would be disagreement between people. Thus, they designed a mechanism to settle those disputes in a civil manner with the rule of law.

Those founding fathers, however, probably did not foresee the sort of lawsuits being increasingly filed today.

For example, there have been a number of lawsuits seeking damages from fast-food chain McDonald’s for making their food so addictive. The claimants argue that this addictive property made them unable to resist the fatty foods and, as a result, they became obese. In other words, McDonald’s should pay for serving good-tasting food that their customers kept voluntarily returning for.

Now, I’m no authority on the legal codes of this country, but from a logical standpoint, customers suing a restaurant for its food being irresistibly tasty is truly baffling to me. Particularly when the lawsuit demands several thousands of dollars (if not more) as compensation.

Well now, why should it stop at McDonald’s? The cow that the burger patties came from is also to blame. The estate of the obviously dead cow and the rancher that raised it should also be made to pay for their parts in this fat-laden odyssey. And let’s not forget the fries that were likely super-sized by the disgruntled customers. Aren’t the potato farmers and the suppliers of the fry oil to blame also? Should they not also add their apologies (in the form of dollars, of course) to the settlement the plaintiffs seek?

No. In fact, this sort of lawsuit in its entirety is flawed. This is why almost all have been thrown out in courts.

That’s all fine, but by the time they were thrown out, these lawsuits had wasted the time and resources of the courts they were heard in. Almost all courts around the nation are severely strained and have a solid backlog of cases. Baseless cases such as the aforementioned only aggravate the existing difficulties by adding to the courts’ workload and diverting resources from cases that actually have a valid basis for existing.

And what is truly disheartening is that the McDonald’s illustration is just one example.

There has been a deluge of these cases in recent years. Examples include parents suing a cheerleading coach for failing to appoint their young daughter squad captain and coffee shops being sued because their cups did not clearly indicate that the coffee contained within was indeed hot.

The story of the dog-biting woman from Florida illustrates two virtues which are crucial to lessening the number of these frivolous and laughable lawsuits.

First, simply exercising common sense would ensure that these lawsuits remain exactly where they should — deep inside the recesses of the minds of those who are thinking about suing. Secondly, and more importantly, one should take steps to address one’s own grievances.

I’m not advocating vigilantism, but rather I’m saying one should do exactly as the dog victim did: Work to improve troubles in a meaningful way.

Instead of suffering the dog bites and playing the role of helpless victim later, she used the human attributes of reason and rationality to improve the situation for all those involved, the dog included.

Does she have reason to sue? Definitely. Will she? Possibly.

If she does, will the fact that she actually fought off the dog add to her credibility? Absolutely.

This is the crucial piece that many money-hungry plaintiffs in our sue-happy society often overlook.

Before automatically dialing the nearest attorney of flexible standards, we should think about what we ourselves can do to improve our situation.

Everything is simply less complicated that way.