Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Lamberts throwed rolls must hurt if you don't catch them.

+2
2seaoat
dumpcare
6 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

dumpcare



http://www.epictimes.com/2015/08/customer-sues-throwed-rolls-restaurant-after-being-injured-by-roll/

OZARK, Mo. — A well-known Missouri restaurant, famous for being the “Home of Throwed Rolls,” is being sued by a patron who was hit, and allegedly injured, when he was hit by a… you guessed it – a thrown roll.

Lambert’s Cafe, which features dinner rolls being thrown across the room by servers to guests, is being sued by a woman named Troy Tucker. The customer claims to have “sustained a lacerated cornea with a vitreous detachment and all head, neck, eyes and vision were severely damaged” after being hit by a dinner roll during a visit in September of 2014.

Now, I’m not a doctor but unless the roll was frozen, and thrown by Peyton Manning from two feet away, I’m not sure how a roll could cause severe damage to “all head, neck, eyes and vision”.

ALSO TRENDING: Oddly-Shaped Weather Map Turns News Crew Into 6th Graders

Tucker is seeking $25,000 to cover medical bills and legal fees. The restaurant’s “carelessness and negligence” as the lawsuit alleges has already caused expenses totaling $10,000.

The lawsuit claims that the restaurant should have known about the dangers involved in their signature practice.

And what about the customers knowing the “dangers” involved with eating at a place KNOWN FOR THROWING ROLLS!?!?

Well, we can thank hot dogs for setting a legal precedent…

2seaoat



If the woman had injuries to her eye which legitimately caused 10k of medical treatment because somebody negligently threw a roll at her in a public restaurant, who would have a problem with a jury finding that the restaurant was negligent and award damages to compensate for the injuries?

dumpcare



You have been to Lambert's have you not? The person who allegedly threw this roll and hit her eye (like the article said) would have to have an arm like Peyton manning to do that damage. I have never seen them at the Lambert's over in Foley toss a roll or throw them hard enough to do any damage.

2seaoat



toss a roll or throw them hard enough to do any damage.

10k medical bills does not sound like a soft toss, and getting hit in the eye by anything thrown is extremely dangerous.  If you are going to throw things in a business, make sure that your employees are not negligent.  This is a no brainer.

TEOTWAWKI

TEOTWAWKI

Yes even though thousands and thousands of rolls have been thrown harmlessly we must now invoke the Nanny state rules police.

Joanimaroni

Joanimaroni

We have been a couple of times....the rolls were thrown on request. I guess someone was a poor roll thrower.

The kids loved it!

2seaoat



Yes even though thousands and thousands of rolls have been thrown harmlessly we must now invoke the Nanny state rules police.

This has nothing to do with the government or nanny state.   It is two autos involved in an accident where one of the drivers is suing the other for negligent actions which were the proximate cause of injuries where they want compensation for those injuries.  What I find remarkable is this idea that somebody who was  injured is being attacked.   Clearly, the employee did not intentionally try to injure this woman's eye, and clearly the restaurant patrons love the idea of thrown rolls, but this was simply an apparent bad throw which caused injury.  The same restaurant could have negligently kept a sanitary kitchen and if people were sickened because of the tainted food being sold, would anybody be talking about nanny state or attacking the victims?  Pretty strange in my opinion.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

2seaoat wrote:[b]Yes even though thousands and thousands of rolls have been thrown harmlessly we must now invoke the Nanny state rules police.

This has nothing to do with the government or nanny state.   It is two autos involved in an accident where one of the drivers is suing the other for negligent actions which were the proximate cause of injuries where they want compensation for those injuries. 

Don't you love it, teo.  He can't tell the difference between a roll made with flour and a 3000 lb piece of metal.  lol

I've heard many a democrat tort lawyer make the same speech,  but this is the first "lifelong republican" in american history saying the same thing.  
Boy are these silly labels "republican", "democrat",  "liberal" and "conservative" becoming more and more meaningless by the day.  lol

Hallmarkgard



My claim to fame is that I have been to all 3 Lamberts.. LOL

2seaoat



Don't you love it, teo.  He can't tell the difference between a roll made with flour and a 3000 lb piece of metal.  lol

So Bob, you are paying monthly payments on health billings where nobody did anything to you, and if that roll caused you 10k of damage to your eye, I take it that you would just ask the hospital and doctors to give you a payment plan.....now that is funny......except an eye injury is no joke.

Oh I forgot.....the taxpayers will pay so of course you are good with people being injured......but I remember a month and a half of whining about having to pay a medical bill because your insurance would not cover it, and now you want this woman to pay that bill.......at least you are consistently wrong.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum