Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 
I'm sure Cincinnati is a great place but this lawsuit has fraud written all over it.
I searched for an hour on this story and I have yet to find anywhere where the details get any clearer than : "He had it in his pocket in the off position and it caught fire melting his underwear and burning his leg."
Some obvious questions: Was it in his back pocket? Did he habitually keep it in his back pocket? had he ever sat on the thing? How did he know it was in the off position if it was in his pocket? Was the burn on his leg because of the nylon underwear or a burn from the actual product?
There are also no pictures to be found and no stats on how many time this has happened before. A company is not liable for this kind of thing unless there is a design flaw that contributed to it.

I'm sure Cincinnati is a great place but this lawsuit has fraud written all over it.
- It's not a class action as it should be if it's the real deal.
- It charges all kinds of people that have nothing to do with the design of the product
- It's really short on any kind of detail of what actually happened
- It's written by someone who doesn't even know what the name of the product is.
I searched for an hour on this story and I have yet to find anywhere where the details get any clearer than : "He had it in his pocket in the off position and it caught fire melting his underwear and burning his leg."
Some obvious questions: Was it in his back pocket? Did he habitually keep it in his back pocket? had he ever sat on the thing? How did he know it was in the off position if it was in his pocket? Was the burn on his leg because of the nylon underwear or a burn from the actual product?
There are also no pictures to be found and no stats on how many time this has happened before. A company is not liable for this kind of thing unless there is a design flaw that contributed to it.
You have never done insurance claims, have you? This lawsuit doesn't have fraud written all over it, unless it is proven that the iPod is either not defective, or did not explode. Even if it is not proven, it is not fraud. Fraud is the willful intent to deceive someone. The plaintiff is simply making a claim for damages. I will review your points:
1) Not everything is a class action lawsuit, most are not. Class action only applies if a claim affects a large number of people, and the court approves the declaration of a class action. If this is the only iPod that exploded, then it won't qualify as a class action. It needs to be a large number of people
2) It charges all kinds of people because there are many different vendors involved in the making of an iPod. In a products liability case, you would want your attorney to file suit against all of them since it is not yet known what caused the iPod to explode. If you leave out one company, you have no claim against them. Apple designed the iPod, they didn't build them.
3) All lawsuits are short on detail. They are vague on purpose since it is not yet proven what caused the failure.
4) The attorney does know what the product is. Most items in a lawsuit are later abbreviated. The beginning of the suit most likely references the iPod Touch, and then says to be known later in the suit as iTouch.
You won't find any details regarding this case because most lawsuits are private. Not everything is disclosed to the public. It doesn't matter what pocket it was in, nor does it matter if it was on or off. If it is defective, it could still overheat. Who the hell wears nylon underwear??? You won't find pictures unless you happen to be on the jury. You are correct. A company is not liable unless a defect is found, and that is the reason for the suit. It will be proven in court if the iPod was in fact defective, or a component of the iPod was defective.





...And the trailer parks always got to have those weird wind-chime-sculpture-things. Presumably to warn them of tornadoes. Or maybe I'm thinking of that movie "Twister" with that deligthful Helen Hunt.






\