Crowds rushing the door at 5am on Black Friday? I'm shocked! :wow:


It's not like this was unexpected. Any large store should have security people out front controlling the crowd and making sure people are in a proper line and file in one at a time. WalMart is indeed liable in this case. They cannot claim they didn't know a large crowd would rush into the store, and yet they had insufficient security personel there to manage the crowd. Watch....this case will settle very quickly.

and sue the ho too for not telling you she had a disease, as well as the beer/liquor manufacturer for not properly labeling thier products with the warning that you may sleep with said ho and get a disease, your friends for not stopping you from getting with the ho, and the ho's parents because they should have raised her better. :rofl:

Although, I still feel Wal-Mart is at minimum, partially responsible for what happened, that is a pretty awesome analogy. :thumbup:

:iagree:

LOL:rofl: :rofl: Wagner

My point is people sue for anything here....Unless laws are changed it will keep on happening...

& IMO as Eric said...Walmart should have taken better precautions in controlling the crowd....maybe have had a security guy open the door....

The local best buy had ungodly amounts of people waiting to get in on black friday... and had NO incidents like this. They took the precautions that walmart didn't and had quite a few police on hand that had all the waiting people in a single file line wrapping around the building and up the street. And they metered how many people were entering, and didn't let the store get overcrowded.

Crowd control should have been practiced on walmarts part, not just opening the gates like at the tracks... But why would a pregnant lady put herself in the front of that anxious mob anyways!?! Anyone who waits in the unruly mob waiting to storm the doors at opening is not only slightly retarded, but asking for trouble.

:iagree: Wal-mart is not all innocent. They should have done what other stores like Best buy etc. do, give the tickets to everyone in line before store opens so they don't have to rush to break-in. This shows poor crowd/customer management on BF morning by Wal-mart.

All the comments posted are interesting but it would be
a help if someone could post case law for the City,county
and state where this happened.

Providing that information would provide a better
basis for determining what legal recourse
anyone has in this regard.

Remember Lawsuits are never about what's right
especially when it comes to Walmart.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/25/wal...tle/index.html

No.:confused: The bar owner would be immune from any liability under the anti dram-shop law, if your state has it on the books. In Louisiana, bar owners are immune from any tort liability related to the consumption or service of alcohol. They cannot even be held liable for DUI related accidents.

For immunity under the anti-dram shop statute to apply: (1) the bar owner must hold a permit to serve alcoholic beverages; (2) the bar owner or its personnel served alcoholic beverages to a person over the lawful drinking age; (3) the purchaser suffered and/or caused another to suffer an injury off the bar's premises; and (4) the injury was caused by the purchaser's intoxication.

I heard this on the radio on my drive home. They theory that it's Wally Mart's fault for whipping all those people into a homicidal frenzy. :tsk:

On the same note, the family of one of the dead guys from the Toys 'R Us shooting on Black Friday has an attorney. Who are they gonna sue? Not the other dead guy. Clearly, Toys 'R Us should have had metal detectors. SUE!!! :mad:

If that is their theory, then the attorneys are incompetent and not very learned.

As far as the Toys 'R Us situ, the company should have nothing to worry about, IMO. It is not reasonably forseeable for two men to shoot it out in the Barbie section. Therefore, there is no way for them to anticipate or prepare themselves for it. Toys R Us may give it nuisance value just to make it go away.