Simon sued the pharmacy for not taking proper precautions to avoid theft of drugs.

That is completely farked up.

This is why we can't have nice things

What an idiot, blaming other idiots for his own idiocy. Idiotic.

I think what's going on here is that it's employee theft--that's what puts the pharmacy on the hook.

I'd sooner go out of business than settle a lawsuit like this.

What? If person B steals a gun from person A and hurts person C, person C can sue person A for 4 million dollars? Why isn't person B the one getting sued?

stpauler: If you read the article, the person suing the pharmacy isn't the same one who stole the drugs from the pharmacy (who was an employee of that pharmacy). The claimant was also a minor at the time and is declared "incompetent".

So your point would be? What? that taking a drug from someone not a Dr, and not knowing the source should absolve himself of any culpability?

Idiotic judgement. Fail.

There's something not quite right about this story. Guy takes a Xanax and then goes into a coma? Not very likely unless he chased it with a few more or some other medication.

Hey country...

They should all pitch in an buy him a gun and a single bullet.

So if the victim is "incompetent", how in the heck can he "say that he suffered permanent nerve damage". (guessing that's what the lawsuit said and the reporter couldn't be bothered to actually make sense of it)

Cases like this are why people think we need tort reform. If someone steals something from you and uses it to hurt someone else, why should you have any liability? I know the lawyers are using the attractive nuisance theory (you should have put up an 8 ft fence to your pool, not 6 foot! You should have locked your car - if you had the car thief wouldn't have run into my client!) but unless the pharmacy was completely stupid like leaving narcotics out in the open with zero controls, this sounds like their insurance company didn't want to fight it.

Doesn't the federal government regulate controlled substances? If the plaintiff's attorney is correct, shouldn't the pharmacist lose their license?

FTA: "Scott Simon says he suffered permanent nerve damage after taking Xanax [...] Simon's attorney, John Schepisi, tells The Record newspaper The Saddle River resident can't walk without help and has been declared incompetent.


Next time just smoke some weed.

clancifer: This was a settlement -- the pharmacy agreed to this amount. Is that the same thing as 'awarded'?

That means that they agreed to pay a sum that was less than the original claim.

Step 1: Smash and grab a display case full of diamond jewelry at your local department store.

Step 2: Cut hand on broken glass.

Step 3: Sue parent company of department store for injuries sustained and not securing valuables against all threats.

Step 4: Profit!

Step aside, lottery tickets. There's a new foolproof retirement plan in town.

Loren: I think what's going on here is that it's employee theft--that's what puts the pharmacy on the hook.

Still, I can only see the plaintiff being in the right if either 1) the company's internal policies did not adequately match DEA rules on tracking and securing prescription drugs, or 2) the company's management ignored blatant violations of the company's internal policies. Prescription drugs are Serious Bizness, but holding a company liable for a single bad low-level employee is kind of silly.

Anyway, I'm sure that award is going to get appealed. Who knows how much this guy will actually end up getting.

Mock26: They should all pitch in an buy him a gun and a single bullet.

this loser shouldn't even get the bullet, he should just have to pistol whip himself to death.

clancifer: This was a settlement -- the pharmacy agreed to this amount. Is that the same thing as 'awarded'?

no it's not. also there are probably a lot of details being left out. I've done a bit of googling on this and there seems to be extenuating circumstances that are being kept hush hush.
I'm guessing the pharmacy wasn't doing their due diligence in their handling of schedule 1 narcotics. Also the homeowners (from the rumor mill) have their reasons to keep this on the down low.

Arkanaut: Anyway, I'm sure that award is going to get appealed. Who knows how much this guy will actually end up getting.


FTA: "SADDLE RIVER, N.J. - A New Jersey man who overdosed on drugs stolen from a pharmacy is getting $4.1 million to settle his lawsuit."

Appeal a settlement?

Unlikely.

Thisbymaster: What? If person B steals a gun from person A and hurts person C, person C can sue person A for 4 million dollars? Why isn't person B the one getting sued?

First, B didn't hurt C with the 'gun' ... B lent C the 'gun' and C hurt himself.

Second, B did get sued (or his parents anyway) and they are paying a settlement as well.

While I can see B getting sued, it is ridiculous to sue A ... they've been victimized twice now over the same drugs.

IanMoone: unless the pharmacy was completely stupid like leaving narcotics out in the open with zero controls, this sounds like their insurance company didn't want to fight it.

I'd have to believe that this is the issue. They probably have it on record that drugs were going missing from the pharmacy and didn't do anything about it. I'm sure it's pretty clear to any pharmacist that you have to be vigilant with theft and not doing so is pretty damn ignorant.

Hobodeluxe: clancifer: This was a settlement -- the pharmacy agreed to this amount. Is that the same thing as 'awarded'?

no it's not. also there are probably a lot of details being left out. I've done a bit of googling on this and there seems to be extenuating circumstances that are being kept hush hush.
I'm guessing the pharmacy wasn't doing their due diligence in their handling of schedule 1 narcotics. Also the homeowners (from the rumor mill) have their reasons to keep this on the down low.

And the 4 million isn't just from the pharmacy. It's from the parent's who's kid had the party, the person who stole the drugs, and the pharmacy. Yeah, sounds like no one involved wants criminal charges, and is paying through the nose to avoid them.

what a farked up country the USA has become.

even if the drugs were lying in the street with a sign pointing to them that said FREE DRUGS, it's always somebody's choice to take them.

when he filed that lawsuit he should have been taken out back and punched in the head.
as with all such plaintiffs.

Amos Quito: Arkanaut: Anyway, I'm sure that award is going to get appealed. Who knows how much this guy will actually end up getting.


FTA: "SADDLE RIVER, N.J. - A New Jersey man who overdosed on drugs stolen from a pharmacy is getting $4.1 million to settle his lawsuit."

Appeal a settlement?

Unlikely.

Well damn, that sounds like a pharmacy I want to work for. Free drugs to take home and cash to spare.

Farking Canuck: Thisbymaster: What? If person B steals a gun from person A and hurts person C, person C can sue person A for 4 million dollars? Why isn't person B the one getting sued?

First, B didn't hurt C with the 'gun' ... B lent C the 'gun' and C hurt himself.

Second, B did get sued (or his parents anyway) and they are paying a settlement as well.

While I can see B getting sued, it is ridiculous to sue A ... they've been victimized twice now over the same drugs.

B has no money , A has a lot

Farking Canuck: Thisbymaster: What? If person B steals a gun from person A and hurts person C, person C can sue person A for 4 million dollars? Why isn't person B the one getting sued?

First, B didn't hurt C with the 'gun' ... B lent C the 'gun' and C hurt himself.

Second, B did get sued (or his parents anyway) and they are paying a settlement as well.

While I can see B getting sued, it is ridiculous to sue A ... they've been victimized twice now over the same drugs.

Except in this case "A" has the deepest pockets so they get sued because B doesn't have $4 million, so it wouldn't pay to only sue them.

In this kind of lawsuit lawyers look for the deepest pockets and find some tenuous reason to include them in the suit. Chances are the deep pockets will settle before going to trial making this a winning strategy for "C".

Yes, the us legal system if farked-up.

FFFFUUUUU SCOTT SIMON!

Happy Friday to the rest of you.

FYI - my Christmas party has been cancelled. All future parties have been cancelled. Anybody coming to visit MUST sign a legal waiver.

On the plus side, anyboy who's going to wolf down a bunch of pills that someone hands him at a party, probably doesn't have the best decision making skills. I give him two years before the his worthless ass is flat broke, or OD'ed.

Chagrin: IanMoone: unless the pharmacy was completely stupid like leaving narcotics out in the open with zero controls, this sounds like their insurance company didn't want to fight it.

I'd have to believe that this is the issue. They probably have it on record that drugs were going missing from the pharmacy and didn't do anything about it. I'm sure it's pretty clear to any pharmacist that you have to be vigilant with theft and not doing so is pretty damn ignorant.

I don't see any way that the drugs could have been stolen without anyone noticing when it's a drug with a high street valu multiple people count the pills being given to the customer and the amount of pills remaining in the stores bottle before the script is handed to the customer

haywatchthis: Farking Canuck: Thisbymaster: What? If person B steals a gun from person A and hurts person C, person C can sue person A for 4 million dollars? Why isn't person B the one getting sued?

First, B didn't hurt C with the 'gun' ... B lent C the 'gun' and C hurt himself.

Second, B did get sued (or his parents anyway) and they are paying a settlement as well.

While I can see B getting sued, it is ridiculous to sue A ... they've been victimized twice now over the same drugs.

B has no money , A has a lot

which is why A should finish the job that B started....

Old enough to know better: On the plus side, anyboy who's going to wolf down a bunch of pills that someone hands him at a party, probably doesn't have the best decision making skills. I give him two years before the his worthless ass is flat broke, or OD'ed.

that's the spread the wealth plan, works better than trickle down plan

Since when did Saddle River move to South Jersey?

emersonbiggins: Step 1: Smash and grab a display case full of diamond jewelry at your local department store.

Step 2: Cut hand on broken glass.

Step 3: Sue parent company of department store for injuries sustained and not securing valuables against all threats.

Step 4: Profit!

Sadly, there is most likely a real case out there identical to what you just described.

I'm still trying to get over the case from a few years ago, where an armed burglar shot and killed an eldery woman in her own home, then sued her estate for injuries he sustained in the struggle prior to shooting her, and he WON the case.

That's right, he successfully sued his own murder victim for the injuries he sustained while murdering her.

namatad: A New Jersey man who overdosed on drugs stolen from a pharmacy is getting $4.1 million to settle his lawsuit.

we need to stop settling cases like this.
it only makes things WORSE.
we need to destroy people who sue in cases like this and the companies who settle.

If they settle it's because their lawyers feel strongly that the other team's layers have an emotionally compelling case that would sway a jury. It's ultimately society's fault.

Loreweaver: emersonbiggins: Step 1: Smash and grab a display case full of diamond jewelry at your local department store.

Step 2: Cut hand on broken glass.

Step 3: Sue parent company of department store for injuries sustained and not securing valuables against all threats.

Step 4: Profit!

Sadly, there is most likely a real case out there identical to what you just described.

I'm still trying to get over the case from a few years ago, where an armed burglar shot and killed an eldery woman in her own home, then sued her estate for injuries he sustained in the struggle prior to shooting her, and he WON the case.

That's right, he successfully sued his own murder victim for the injuries he sustained while murdering her.

you should sue the glass company for making sharp glass

The stories that make the papers are told the way the corporate lawyers want them told, and not it's usually the full story hence the 'settlement'. There is a billion dollar industry of PR spin and "Tort Reform" advocacy protecting business negligence in this country and it never sleeps; the same businesses that buy the ads in the papers.

I tried to watch the documentary 'Hot Coffee' on HBO the other night, but being a Texan, when it got to the part about Governor George Bush and Karl Rove I threw a shoe at my TV.

If you think lawsuits are out of control and some little old lady sued McDonald's out of $3 million dollars because she spilled a little hot coffee, you have been duped again. Watch the documentary if you want to be pissed off (again).

Keep Occupy Alive

chuckufarlie: FYI - my Christmas party has been cancelled. All future parties have been cancelled. Anybody coming to visit MUST sign a legal waiver.


You're going Galt!

I bet you didn't know you were some kind of Randian protagonist.