Posted on 10/28/2009 12:55:08 PM PDT by DemforBush
What's the cost of not showing up to court? For PepsiCo Inc., it's a $1.26 billion default judgment. A Wisconsin state court socked the company with the monster award in a case alleging that PepsiCo stole the idea to bottle and sell purified water from two Wisconsin men.
Now the company is scrambling to salvage the situation. The damages award was handed down on Sept. 30. PepsiCo filed motions to vacate the order and dismiss the claims on Oct. 13, saying it wasn't even aware of the lawsuit until Oct. 6....
(Excerpt) Read more at finance.yahoo.com ...
What a novel idea...!
Pepsi..keep on pushing your GAY agenda! Strange things like this will start to happen...
The charge sounds ridiculous...the “Idea” to bottle water has been around for ages. I have an old stoneware water bottle.
So Pepsi, and not the courts, are the sole arbiter of what is right, and what is not?
Didn’t say “sole arbiter”.
If some yahoo files a gazillion dollar suit against you because he claims copyright on the phrase “So Pepsi, and not the courts, are the sole arbiter of what is right, and what is not?” and says you stole that phrase to his everlasting agony, will you proceed to spend several thousand dollars responding to the suit? No, you’ll blow him off.
Ditto Pepsi. A couple Yahoos from Wisconsin say selling water in a bottle was their idea and Pepsi stole it. Does Pepsi take them - and all other frivolous/trolling/harassing suits - seriously at a cost of several thousand dollars each? or just ignore the idiocy?
well anyone can produce water bottles. it takes a special kind of industrial genius to put the water into the water bottles.
Not if I've been served with official docs telling me I'm being sued, and knowing that courts find for the party actually appearing and not "blowing them off", then yes, I would appear.
My point was that Pepsi does not have the right to decide what is legally correct and what is not. That is for the courts to decide.
This will cost Pepsi millions of $$$$, and quite frankly, I’m happy they get to pay. The slimeballs running that company deserve to get “bitch-slapped” twice a day in my opinion.
You go right ahead and try that course of action the next time someone serves you with legal papers. Be sure you keep detailed notes so you can share the outcome with the rest of the class.
Thanks,
L
please see my response #7
I think your memory is a bit off - by ‘acknowledging’, they meant ‘commenting in public’ on a lawsuit. Hence why the universal corporate answer to “Are you being sued?” is “We do not discuss any ongoing litigation.”
no, I have been told that in some cases it is best not to acknowledge a lawsuit by a lawyer.
“I was told acknowledging a lawsuit could be detrimental to your defence. I made no judgment about the case itself. “
I think you’ve got a good cause of action against your business law school. You HAVE to answer a law suit or you lose by default.
That’s part of the problem with our system. Walmart for instance, gets sued dozens of times every day - and they have to answer every one - or face a default judgement.
All that said, the reward amount is silly and sure to be reversed.
Basically, they are above the law. Why don’t you, “do the right thing,” by not acknowledging the next traffic ticket you get.
I’d love to see a citation on that.
Traffic tickets are dismissed everyday because the cop didn’t show in court that day.
Then you need to get your money back on that course. That can get you zinged for ridiculous amounts of money. (I have a family member who *is* an attorney.) You’re not supposed to acknowledge as in comment publicly, but you are supposed to respond in the court system lest you get a default judgement lodged against you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.