The Covid cure has arrived! (2 Viewers)

[AccessBlaster]

 

[Isaac]

View attachment 94671

Atta boy - lookin' at the bright side! I see it like....ok, I took the vaccine that may have saved my life in the short term.
Then in the longer term I may get paid for my eventual troubles...Win win. As long as it's not a 3rd arm out the top of my head, I do not want one for any price.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Hopefully, we didn't sign a waiver

 

[Isaac]

Hopefully, we didn't sign a waiver

Aww, crap.

 

[AccessBlaster]

If anyone tells you not to do your own research, they might not have your best interests in mind.
Just sayin.

The eunuch at CNN needs for you to trust his "unReliable Sources"

 

[AccessBlaster]

 

[Pat Hartman]

Hopefully, we didn't sign a waiver

You actually did sign a waiver. Remember' this drug we all took was an "emergency use only" drug given the lack of time for double-blind studies. We'll know in about 10 years if it is actually safe.

The government could have solved a lot of the problems by indemnifying businesses from being held liable if customers or employees caught the virus but then those businesses would be doing the administration's bidding to cancel the bill of rights for us.

 

[Isaac]

I seem to remember the Republicans trying hard to include a business no-liability clause in various bills related to COVID. So that they wouldn't be flooded with lawsuits of people who think they got COVID was the business owner's fault. Doubt they were ever successful.

Also, I think there's still hope on liability. I remember a long section of my Torts and Contracts classes, which contained a LOT of interrelated stuff, dealing with the concept of liability even after you have supposedly signed it away. All kinds of exceptions - unconscionability, duress, and no other options come to mind but I think there was more. Lawyers can always try to argue that despite having signed a waiver, liability might still exist. Like every other legal argument, it all depends....and usually isn't nearly as cut-and-dried as laypeople (nor cops, for example) believe.

 

[moke123]

I seem to remember the Republicans trying hard to include a business no-liability clause in various bills related to COVID. So that they wouldn't be flooded with lawsuits of people who think they got COVID was the business owner's fault. Doubt they were ever successful.

Also, I think there's still hope on liability. I remember a long section of my Torts and Contracts classes, which contained a LOT of interrelated stuff, dealing with the concept of liability even after you have supposedly signed it away. All kinds of exceptions - unconscionability, duress, and no other options come to mind but I think there was more. Lawyers can always try to argue that despite having signed a waiver, liability might still exist. Like every other legal argument, it all depends....and usually isn't nearly as cut-and-dried as laypeople (nor cops, for example) believe.

Pending California Case Could Upend Workers’ Compensation “Exclusive Remedy” for COVID-19 Claims

One silver lining for employers during the pandemic has been the reality that they shouldn’t fear any potential tort liability for COVID-19 cases stemming from the workplace – or should they? Most…

www.fisherphillips.com

 

[Isaac]

Pending California Case Could Upend Workers’ Compensation “Exclusive Remedy” for COVID-19 Claims

One silver lining for employers during the pandemic has been the reality that they shouldn’t fear any potential tort liability for COVID-19 cases stemming from the workplace – or should they? Most…

www.fisherphillips.com

That is interesting, thanks for posting. (I was more thinking of customers - but it was a very interesting read anyway).
I guess it remains to be seen how much a CA trial court's ruling of law will have in the longer term, and on other states, but I guess someone had to be the one to try it - who better than a los angeles area trial judge. I am thinking it will have about as much impact as the judge farting. But who knows.

With the sheer volume of US employees who got - and suffered, in some way - from COVID, and the limitless amount of arguing that could go on regarding the minute details of sanitization or protection protocols, it seems the whole nation would collapse under the weight of the water from such a large floodgate. Even CA would need to fine-tune their new little legal theory to limit that one.

 

[moke123]

If anyone tells you not to do your own research, they might not have your best interests in mind.
Just sayin.

The eunuch at CNN needs for you to trust his "unReliable Sources"

View attachment 94704

 

[AccessBlaster]

The only product in history whose failure is blamed on those that didn’t use it.

 

[Pat Hartman]

Since you don't run into asbestos everywhere, the original lawsuit makes sense. With COVID, you just pick the company with the deepest pockets since there is no way to prove where you got it. That's why the indemnity is necessary.

 

[AccessBlaster]

That's why the indemnity is necessary.

Indemnity is necessary because they're saying refusal to accept the jab will result in job loss. You will not be able to sue your employer because of the CDC recommendations, good luck suing the Federal Government. There will be class actions brought but we know who the big winners of class actions lawsuits are.

 

[moke123]

You will not be able to sue your employer because of the CDC recommendations,

You can not sue your employer as workman's comp. is the exclusive remedy.

 

[Pat Hartman]

I think the lawsuits are going to be about bad reactions to the vaccine by younger people who would never have taken the vaccine to begin with. Again, we would pick the deepest pockets because there will be lots of options.

How about the medical malpractice suits that will well up once the studies regarding how well some of the therapeutics work to control COVID in the early days. If your doctor refuses to treat you immediately when you test positive, you might want a signed statement so you can sue him if you end up in the hospital because he told you to tough it out and call me if you can't breath.

 

[Isaac]

Indemnity is necessary because they're saying refusal to accept the jab will result in job loss. You will not be able to sue your employer because of the CDC recommendations, good luck suing the Federal Government. There will be class actions brought but we know who the big winners of class actions lawsuits are.

some of them are so ridiculous, the other day I got an email saying i could participate in one if I had bought chicken during a 10 year period. i'm not kidding. of course i said yes - it was serious - included tyson and a bunch of others. has anyone else seen this?

tell ya what, I can't wait for 2 years from now when i open my mail to that $2.67 check for some chicken labelling problem from 2005.

 

[AccessBlaster]

 

[AccessBlaster]

Or did they?

 

[NauticalGent]

Love this guy...