Ludicrous Lawsuits

Ridiculous lawsuits are popping up fairly frequently so instead of creating a new topic for each one, I figured we could simply post them here.  I'll start off with this one:

http://abcnews.go.com/Weird/wireStory/blind-man-sues-mcdonalds-car-drive-policy-39524781

our local wendy's has a sign on the drive through that they will only serve vehicles in the drive through...no walk ups.   

While I can't imagine wanting McDonald's food enough to sue them for it, I think that guy has a legitimate gripe.

Businesses are required to make reasonable accommodations under the ADA.  Suing because you're blind and can't use the drive-thru is not a reasonable accommodation.  

Ramnares P.E. said:

Businesses are required to make reasonable accommodations under the ADA.  Suing because you're blind and can't use the drive-thru is not a reasonable accommodation.  

Click to expand...

It seems like a reasonable accommodation could be made.  They are open.  Non-blind are able to get their food.  He can not.  If not at the drive thru, via another means (like lobby entrance perhaps).

The alternative that I've seen is a walk-up window but most fast food places that I've seen with those limit the opening hours of the walk-up window.  

Can't wait for him to sue them again in a couple years when he gets hit by a car in their drive-thru...

thekzieg PE said:

Can't wait for him to sue them again in a couple years when he gets hit by a car in their drive-thru...

Click to expand...

I'm not sure why the immediate presumption is that the drive thru must be the avenue of accommodation for the blind, but that is a recurring theme in the comments on the article as well.

Audi driver said:

I'm not sure why the immediate presumption is that the drive thru must be the avenue of accommodation for the blind, but that is a recurring theme in the comments on the article as well.

Click to expand...

Because that's the whole lawsuit...

"[COLOR= rgb(51, 51, 51)]A blind Louisiana man is suing McDonald's for the right to get served at the chain's drive-thru windows."[/COLOR]

so is the premise basically like midnight when the lobby is closed he has no recourse because he can't drive to use the drive through therefore can't get himself some mcD's?   

thekzieg PE said:

Because that's the whole lawsuit...

"[COLOR= rgb(51, 51, 51)]A blind Louisiana man is suing McDonald's for the right to get served at the chain's drive-thru windows."[/COLOR]

Click to expand...

Fair enough.  According to the actual suit, that is a bit of a mischaracterization of what he wants, which in actuality is "reasonable accommodation".

thekzieg PE said:

Because that's the whole lawsuit...

"[COLOR= rgb(51, 51, 51)]A blind Louisiana man is suing McDonald's for the right to get served at the chain's drive-thru windows."[/COLOR]

Click to expand...

well than he better sue all fast food restaurants and not just the magic arches since most if not all prevent walk ups to the drive through.

snickerd3 said:

well than he better sue all fast food restaurants and not just the magic arches since most if not all prevent walk ups to the drive through.

Click to expand...

Perhaps the strategy is to tackle the big dog first.

so when did getting to buy fast food become a protected right?

By that logic, I'm going to sue McDonald's on behalf of those under 16 years of age, or with no/revoked licenses as well.

They're going to lose this one.  The entire premise of the no-foot-traffic is for pedestrian safety.  They won't serve it to you if you're not on a registered motor vehicle, so you can't get it on a bicycle, either.  

snickerd3 said:

so when did getting to buy fast food become a protected right?

Click to expand...

under the ADA, American's with disabilities have rights of reasonable accommodation.

Supe said:

By that logic, I'm going to sue McDonald's on behalf of those under 16 years of age, or with no/revoked licenses as well.

They're going to lose this one.  The entire premise of the no-foot-traffic is for pedestrian safety.  They won't serve it to you if you're not on a registered motor vehicle, so you can't get it on a bicycle, either.  

Click to expand...

There is no functional equivalent to a bonefide disability and the suspension or a license.  Those under 18 do not have a similar right to reasonable accommodation as an adult with a disability.

Audi driver said:

under the ADA, American's with disabilities have rights of reasonable accommodation.

Click to expand...

They have already provided reasonable accommodation and for safety reasons it isn't allowed.  He would have to give up his right to sue if he is hit by a car in the drive through.  Can't have both, they are looking out for his physical safety which should trump any craving for fast food.  

snickerd3 said:

They have already provided reasonable accommodation and for safety reasons it isn't allowed.  He would have to give up his right to sue if he is hit by a car in the drive through.  Can't have both, they are looking out for his physical safety which should trump any craving for fast food.  

Click to expand...

What is the reasonable accommodation for those that can not drive?

I think its safety issue, people pull through the driveway don't expect a person to be standing there. Less likelihood of someone being killed or seriously injured if your not allowed to walk through the drive thru.

although when I was a kid we used to go to the Hardees drive thru on our bikes all the time, because it was 1984 and life was F'n awesome