There is an interesting verdict out of Riverside, California this week. A 56-year-old woman (identified only as Patricia) was awarded $7 million and a BMW sedan for exposure to herpes but a 77-year-old man.
The lawsuit alleged that the man knew that he had herpes for 25 year before the sexual relationship but did not disclose it and did not wear protection.
Patricia was awarded $4 million in compensatory damages and $2.75 million in punitive damages as well as a BMW car that the man (identified only as Thomas) had originally given her as a gift.
The size of the compensatory damages and punitive damages make this case particularly notable. These cases are often brought not only under negligence but as battery claims. While the sex is consensual, there is no consent to be “touched” by an undisclosed disease. These cases have become more common, including some against celebrities.
For the full story, click here
Hi there, I discovered your website by the use of Google even as searching for a comparable matter, your website came up, it
seems to be good. I have bookmarked it in my google
bookmarks.
Hello there, simply became alert tto your blog through Google, and found that it’s really informative.
I’m going to be careful for brussels. I will appreciate for those who proceed this in future.
Lots of other folks will probably be benefited from your writing.
Cheers!
@ Sally: Uhhhhh……She obviously is a goldigger type, and a very succcesful one at that….the BMW proves that she is good at getting money. The herpes is nasty, but 4 million? Damn, what a precedent.
That’s why a woman shouldn’t date an older man…he’s been around too much. A 21 year age difference is huge. He could be her dad….creepy.
If I’m a single gal at 56, I sure am not going to chase after a 77 yr old guy. I’m going after a guy in his 40’s…50’s would be pushing it.
I didn’t vote for this GARBAG!
1, February 26, 2009 at 7:43 pm………..
Did not vote for this TOTAL GARBAGE!
1, February 26, 2009 at 7:44 pm………..
Did not vote for this trash garbage obama…….
If you voted for President Obama, that would be the WINNER of the last election, you voted FOR all these things because you would have been well aware that most of these were documented during the campaign and the rest of us who voted for him knew these would be among his initiatives. He’s delivering on almost all of his campaign promises. No mystery.
If you didn’t vote for Obama you voted for the guys who caused the problems the President is fixing and LOST the election. ‘Nuff said.
FACT CHECK: Obama’s words on home aid ring hollow
Feb 25, 3:15 AM (ET)
By CALVIN WOODWARD and JIM KUHNHENN
Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) – President Barack Obama knows Americans are unhappy that the government could rescue people who bought mansions beyond their means.
But his assurance Tuesday night that only the deserving will get help rang hollow.
Even officials in his administration, many supporters of the plan in Congress and the Federal Reserve chairman expect some of that money will go to people who used lousy judgment.
The president skipped over several complex economic circumstances in his speech to Congress – and may have started an international debate among trivia lovers and auto buffs over what country invented the car.
A look at some of his assertions:
OBAMA: “We have launched a housing plan that will help responsible families facing the threat of foreclosure lower their monthly payments and refinance their mortgages. It’s a plan that won’t help speculators or that neighbor down the street who bought a house he could never hope to afford, but it will help millions of Americans who are struggling with declining home values.”
THE FACTS: If the administration has come up with a way to ensure money only goes to those who got in honest trouble, it hasn’t said so.
Defending the program Tuesday at a Senate hearing, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said it’s important to save those who made bad calls, for the greater good. He likened it to calling the fire department to put out a blaze caused by someone smoking in bed.
“I think the smart way to deal with a situation like that is to put out the fire, save him from his own consequences of his own action but then, going forward, enact penalties and set tougher rules about smoking in bed.”
Similarly, the head of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. suggested this month it’s not likely aid will be denied to all homeowners who overstated their income or assets to get a mortgage they couldn’t afford.
“I think it’s just simply impractical to try to do a forensic analysis of each and every one of these delinquent loans,” Sheila Bair told National Public Radio.
—
OBAMA: “And I believe the nation that invented the automobile cannot walk away from it.”
THE FACTS: Depends what your definition of automobiles, is. According to the Library of Congress, the inventor of the first true automobile was probably Germany’s Karl Benz, who created the first auto powered by an internal combustion gasoline engine, in 1885 or 1886. In the U.S., Charles Duryea tested what library researchers called the first successful gas-powered car in 1893. Nobody disputes that Henry Ford created the first assembly line that made cars affordable.
—
OBAMA: “We have known for decades that our survival depends on finding new sources of energy. Yet we import more oil today than ever before.”
THE FACTS: Oil imports peaked in 2005 at just over 5 billion barrels, and have been declining slightly since. The figure in 2007 was 4.9 billion barrels, or about 58 percent of total consumption. The nation is on pace this year to import 4.7 billion barrels, and government projections are for imports to hold steady or decrease a bit over the next two decades.
—
OBAMA: “We have already identified $2 trillion in savings over the next decade.”
THE FACTS: Although 10-year projections are common in government, they don’t mean much. And at times, they are a way for a president to pass on the most painful steps to his successor, by putting off big tax increases or spending cuts until someone else is in the White House.
Obama only has a real say on spending during the four years of his term. He may not be president after that and he certainly won’t be 10 years from now.
—
OBAMA: “Regulations were gutted for the sake of a quick profit at the expense of a healthy market. People bought homes they knew they couldn’t afford from banks and lenders who pushed those bad loans anyway. And all the while, critical debates and difficult decisions were put off for some other time on some other day.”
THE FACTS: This may be so, but it isn’t only Republicans who pushed for deregulation of the financial industries. The Clinton administration championed an easing of banking regulations, including legislation that ended the barrier between regular banks and Wall Street banks. That led to a deregulation that kept regular banks under tight federal regulation but extended lax regulation of Wall Street banks. Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, later an economic adviser to candidate Obama, was in the forefront in pushing for this deregulation.
—
OBAMA: “In this budget, we will end education programs that don’t work and end direct payments to large agribusinesses that don’t need them. We’ll eliminate the no-bid contracts that have wasted billions in Iraq, and reform our defense budget so that we’re not paying for Cold War-era weapons systems we don’t use. We will root out the waste, fraud and abuse in our Medicare program that doesn’t make our seniors any healthier, and we will restore a sense of fairness and balance to our tax code by finally ending the tax breaks for corporations that ship our jobs overseas.”
THE FACTS: First, his budget does not accomplish any of that. It only proposes those steps. That’s all a president can do, because control over spending rests with Congress. Obama’s proposals here are a wish list and some items, including corporate tax increases and cuts in agricultural aid, will be a tough sale in Congress.
Second, waste, fraud and abuse are routinely targeted by presidents who later find that the savings realized seldom amount to significant sums. Programs that a president might consider wasteful have staunch defenders in Congress who have fought off similar efforts in the past.
—
OBAMA: “Thanks to our recovery plan, we will double this nation’s supply of renewable energy in the next three years.”
THE FACTS: While the president’s stimulus package includes billions in aid for renewable energy and conservation, his goal is unlikely to be achieved through the recovery plan alone.
In 2007, the U.S. produced 8.4 percent of its electricity from renewable sources, including hydroelectric dams, solar panels and windmills. Under the status quo, the Energy Department says, it will take more than two decades to boost that figure to 12.5 percent.
If Obama is to achieve his much more ambitious goal, Congress would need to mandate it. That is the thrust of an energy bill that is expected to be introduced in coming weeks.
—
OBAMA: “Over the next two years, this plan will save or create 3.5 million jobs.”
THE FACTS: This is a recurrent Obama formulation. But job creation projections are uncertain even in stable times, and some of the economists relied on by Obama in making his forecast acknowledge a great deal of uncertainty in their numbers.
The president’s own economists, in a report prepared last month, stated, “It should be understood that all of the estimates presented in this memo are subject to significant margins of error.”
Beyond that, it’s unlikely the nation will ever know how many jobs are saved as a result of the stimulus. While it’s clear when jobs are abolished, there’s no economic gauge that tracks job preservation. The estimates are based on economic assumptions of how many jobs would be lost without the stimulus.
Associated Press writers Tom Raum, Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar and Dina Cappiello contributed to this story.
Barack’s magical mystery tour
February 24, 2009 Posted by Paul at 9:38 PM
President Obama announced tonight that “our day of reckoning has arrived.” How will our new president respond to this epoch-making challenge? If tonight’s speech is any indication, he will respond with wishful, and indeed magical, thinking.
Thus, Vice President Biden will ensure that the Democrats’ porkfest results in no wasted money because “nobody messes with Joe.” Solar energy and other “renewables” will solve our energy and environmental problems. The goal of providing health insurance for every American (which economists estimate would cost roughly $200 billion) will be accomplished, to the extent that Obama said how, through greater efficiencies resulting from the increased use of computers.
Nor is this all. We will have the world’s highest college graduation rate by 2020 because Obama has told the youth of America that “it is no longer an option to drop out” of school and that it is their patriotic duty to commit at least one year to some form of post-high school education. Along the way, we will find the cure for cancer. And as for our national security, Obama “won’t allow terrorists to plot against us.” This overly ambitious goal — more audacious than that of President Bush who merely wanted to make sure we weren’t attacked — will be achieved at no cost to anyone’s civil liberties.
Oddly, I think Obama is so gifted an orator that he can sell this nonsense, at least on this night. His magical mystery tour is coming to take us away, and plenty of Americans are dying to be taken (Nancy Pelosi certainly is — she looked to be in something like the state in which some of us used to listen to the Magical Mystery album). Many more Americans are willing to suspend their disbelief for a little while.
Will Obama eventually be the victim of his own over-promising? Not necessarily. Most Americans won’t care very much if we don’t cure cancer or if the high school drop-out rate remains where it is. They will be happy enough if their 401k rebounds. In that event, the fact that Obama has no clear idea how to bring this about (does anyone?) won’t matter either.
Obama wants to raise money via pollution caps, give to poor…
CONGRESS: BIG BUCKS TO CANOES & TATTOOS…
Obama Budget Proposes another $750B Bank-Rescue…
TAX THE RICH: Take everything they earn, and it still won’t be enough…
‘It’s more Obama Robin Hood’…
$634B ‘Health-Care Fund’…
FIDELITY exec slams ‘New Deal II’; Blames feds for crisis…
Outlook grim for costly initiatives…
Officials: Obama will OK media photos of war dead…
NEARLY $1 TRILLION IN NEW TAXES
if you consent to sex especially with the knowledge that a 56 year old has arent you responsible for what happens to you?
Is not part of the repsonsibility hers for not asking about past sexual history? Had she asked and he lied to her then she probably has a case.
Is the women waiving her rights by her explicit consent? I dont know the legal terms for this but what I am trying to say is her consent some sort of contract with the man and if it is (she is doing the buying), dosent she need to make sure he is holding up his end of it?
If you are a 56 year old automechanic and you buy a used car wouldnt you look under the hood?
A fib,
With no bib,
Did,
of his money,
Thomas, rid!