Reply #14

In the discussion thread: I have to side with Wal-Mart on this one - Wal-Mart sued for prank pulled by 16 year old customer [View all]

Response to liberal N proud (Original post)

Wed May 16, 2012, 08:16 AM

Blue_Tires (31,753 posts)

14. why even sue?

1. The voice on the PA should have been easily recognizable as a 16-year-old

2. Like 99 percent of 16-year-olds, I don't think he'd even be able to finish the 'announcement' without snickering...

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

44 replies	Author	Time	Post
I have to side with Wal-Mart on this one - Wal-Mart sued for prank pulled by 16 year old customer [View all]	liberal N proud	May 2012	OP
The store should	Meiko	May 2012	#1
A but they do	liberal N proud	May 2012	#2
It depends on the system	Forward2012	May 2012	#4
at the two wal marts I worked for	Maine-ah	May 2012	#35
"Attention, Walmart shoppers!"	randome	May 2012	#37
You hang-out near the phone and watch an employee enter the code. n/t	Ian David	May 2012	#20
It's Walmart's 'fault' perhaps.	randome	May 2012	#3
Wow, people like you disappointment! n-t	Logical	May 2012	#10
Why?	Meiko	May 2012	#44
Possibly so, however, they should subrogate against the boy and his family.	Baitball Blogger	May 2012	#22
The kid is a jerk and...	Cave_Johnson	May 2012	#5
I00% agree! This is NOT walmarts fault! Wish I was on the jury!!	Logical	May 2012	#8
no sympathy here...	lame54	May 2012	#6
LOL, this was not walmarts fault! Jesus, people are not logical!	Logical	May 2012	#9
missing the point...	lame54	May 2012	#12
I think your point is very clear	liberal N proud	May 2012	#13
and i'm not responsible for who wrongfully sues them...	lame54	May 2012	#16
You're not responsible because you have no power one way or the other.	Nuclear Unicorn	May 2012	#23
Go Walmart	lame54	May 2012	#32
So, because I don't support Stalinism I must be a Czarist	Nuclear Unicorn	May 2012	#36
Ok - I'll go with that...	lame54	May 2012	#39
It means you're relying on a false dichotomy.	Nuclear Unicorn	May 2012	#40
you are standing up for the defendant...	lame54	May 2012	#43
you are defending them	qazplm	May 2012	#18
Then let it play out in the courts and see what happens.	Bake	May 2012	#28
Well, now HERE'S a lawsuit that's destined to go a long way.	Buns_of_Fire	May 2012	#7
Your avatar causes me emotional distress.	randome	May 2012	#15
My team of lawyers has advised me to accept your settlement.	Buns_of_Fire	May 2012	#17
Your username mocks those with hemorrhoids. Expect a class action suit!	Kaleva	May 2012	#24
I will gladly serve as a class representative!!	Bake	May 2012	#29
Count your blessings. At least you didn't end up with AWSD...	pinboy3niner	May 2012	#31
Store-wide speaker systems are easy to use, it just	LeftinOH	May 2012	#11
why even sue?	Blue_Tires	May 2012	#14
Because there is money to be had	Amaril	May 2012	#30
As much as it pains me to admit, I agree	obamanut2012	May 2012	#19
That Mitt Romney is getting out of control with his pranking. n/t	Nuclear Unicorn	May 2012	#21
They've got the money	sharp_stick	May 2012	#25
Have to agree that Walmart isn't at fault here -	lynne	May 2012	#26
This is BS, the definition of a frivolous lawsuit,	hifiguy	May 2012	#27
Stupid prank, stupid lawsuit.	Remmah2	May 2012	#33
Wanting free money isn't a psychological disorder	4th law of robotics	May 2012	#34
Plaintiff is a sad, opportunistic POS.	-..__...	May 2012	#38
Wal-mart has a burden of limited responsibility in providing a safe environment for customers	jp11	May 2012	#41
I remember that incident. frivilous law suit.	Liberal_in_LA	May 2012	#42

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.