Quote:
Originally Posted by VeveJones007
There's a difference between filing a lawsuit and it actually producing damages. Simply filing a lawsuit is irrelevant to the discussion.
Also, if you've studied that McDonald's case, you would understand that it is not a good example. They knowingly prepared and served coffee that was too hot; the lady got third degree burns from it and she probably wouldn't have if McDonald's served the coffee at the recommended temperature. Like NFL players, consumers know that they're signing up for something that's hot, but not scalding. In tort law, these differences make a significant difference.
|
You're just playing with the wording about filing, but that really doesn't matter. In both cases, lawsuits were filed and money was paid out.
You can say the players didn't know the degree of danger, but they knew it was a game where they were violently colliding with other players hundreds of times a game every week, during practice, etc. They knew it was very dangerous to do that, but they still sued the NFL saying "The NFL didn't tell me it was dangerous and they knew." The players knew too, but they sued the NFL anyway. So quite obviously in a situation like that, the NFL HAS to change things or risk more of the same lawsuits down the road. They don't have a choice. The players are now complaining about something they made happen.