Thanks to chickpea

I think they could probably get him for maiming.

What about theft?

You got it right Ace. This guy is a first rate asshole.
Too wrapped up in thinking of lawsuit glory to be compassionate enough to give the injured kid a chance to save his finger. I hope the kid counter-sues and the judge buries his foot in this jerk's ass.

L.A. DA Patterico says there's a possibility of a theft prosecution

compos, you think the judge would ever get his foot back?

*that was me

Dumbass is going to sue. Let him. He is going to claim he can't sleep, he can't eat, headaches, inability to concentrate, and most importantly, he can't get it up. His wife will claim he can't get it up, but not so emphatically, since there wasn't much to get up anyway. I as a juror will look at these bullshit madeup claims, think what an asshole the guy is, and the defenant not at fault.

Why am I getting a sense of deja vu with ace's article, including a criminal charge of failure to return lost property? Didn't we cover this last week including all legal theories?

OT, ace, we all know about your, um, "tendencies," but your new "The Point" blogad, uhhh...

Yeah, a bunch of frigging lawyers were commenting on this last week. The leading theory was a cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress which (the frigging lawyers seemed to think) was a stretch to prove but theoretically possible.

In the grand tradition of the English common law, we need to invent a new tort, Blatant Squeekholery, to cover situations like this.

If you could get to the jury, Emotional Distress cause of action would be a slam dunk. Of course, the problem is surviving the various motions to dismiss and for summary judgment.

In the hypothetical situation of a person who finds and keeps a severed body part, IIED is the most fun to think about

elements of IIED

1. intentional act (on purpose, not necessarily intended to cause the pain, but simply intended to occur--i.e. he meant to keep the finger, he didn't just drop it and it landed in his shoe) that is

2. beyond the bounds of socially tolerable conduct (i.e. Blatant Squeekholery--lol)

3. that causes severe emotional distress (proven objectively by medical testimony and victim testimony).

The problem is that it will be difficult to prove that this conduct was "beyond the bounds of socially tolerable conduct." Or, as more conventionally stated, that the defendant's conduct was extreme and outrageous, and extends beyond mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, or petty oppressions.

In our litigious society, there's nothing extreme about a guy who encounters a body part and decides that he has just scored a big-time lawsuit against somebody.

How dumb is this guy to think that a severed body part can be reattached after a *week*? Didn't he have to suffer through high school bio like the rest of us?

I kind of hope he gets a big settlement for his "emotional distress" just so the kid who lost his finger can turn around and sue him for twice his winnings. If it's emotionally distressing to find a finger in your custard, it has to be at least twice as bad to have some jagoff refuse to RETURN it, not to mention prancing in front of the television cameras while waving it.

I'd take my four remaining fingers and pound the guy's fucking face in. Seriously. I mean, what the fuck is wrong with that asshole?

(Note that I believe I'm staying within the "no advocating violence" rule, as I am saying that if I had been in that situation that is what I would have done. I am not advocating anyone else do anything to this fucking asshole.)

Oh, by the way, how soon can we get rid of the blogad with the, uh, shapely guy with the towel hanging 1/4 down his ass? Are you trying to make up with Andrew Sullivan or something?

"Oh, by the way, how soon can we get rid of the blogad with the, uh, shapely guy with the towel hanging 1/4 down his ass?"

Bob, sure the guy is likely light in the loafers. But he's still pretty. Don't you want to keep the female readers happy? If the ladies aren't thrown the occasional er, bone, they might not hang out and talk about their boobs. Just saying.

Ok, I'll bite. So, how ARE your boobs doing today?

Nah, Dogstar, I was not offering my info, but was referring to other comments on other threads. Hang around long enough and, as you already know, it'll happen. ;)

Sounds like the guy could be prosecuted under existing digital crime laws.

ZING!!!!

Thank you! I'll be here all week. Don't forget to tip your waitress.

OT: Anyone round here been reading the Huffingtontoast blog? Jeff G. seems to be fessin up to being a contributor. Some speculatin Ace behind some posts too. Any story forthcoming?

Ray,

I suspect Steve at Hog on Ice is responsible for at least some of it.

Someone over at Jeff G.'s place already mentioned this, but I'll agree and say that I wouldn't be surprised if Allah was behind some of it.

My bad. Didn't see there was a post up here bout it already. I'll just slink away...

Where is Jeff G.s place?

Jeff G = Protein Wisdom

Thanks honey.

Pleasure, ma'am.

Check Allah's blog -- he's denying it.

Hey Ace, where are you? There's some serious CBS-bashing to gear up here.

Trespass against chattels I think is appropriate; not IIED, which requires intent to cause emotional distress. Where your intent is to be a jackass in some other way, and emotional distress is just an incidental side effect, IIED won't fly.

At least not in California. From the Cal. Civil Jury Instructions for intentional infliction of emotional distress:

[Name of plaintiff] claims that [name of defendant]’s conduct
caused [him/her] to suffer severe emotional distress. To establish
this claim, [name of plaintiff] must prove all of the following:
1. That [name of defendant]’s conduct was outrageous;
2. [That [name of defendant] intended to cause [name of
plaintiff] emotional distress;]
[or]
[That [name of defendant] acted with reckless disregard of
the probability that [name of plaintiff] would suffer
emotional distress, knowing that [name of plaintiff] was
present when the conduct occurred;]
3. That [name of plaintiff] suffered severe emotional distress;
and
4. That [name of defendant]’s conduct was a substantial factor
in causing [name of plaintiff]’s severe emotional distress.

Element 3 is the weak link, but the "present when the conduct occurred" branch might have some room for argument at the motion to dismiss stage.

Shit, I meant element #2. Time for me to go home and go to bed. But on a trespass to chattels theory, the plaintiff could recover the amount by which the value of the chattel (the plaintiff's finger) had been diminished. And a jury could have some fun coming up with that number. How much is your finger worth?

In the meantime, how about "negligent infliction of emotional distress"?

God, if I was a Torts professor I'd be finding a way to work this fact pattern into next fall's final exam somehow. Those of you starting law school next fall, take note.

Begging to Differ had an interesting round of comments, being they're a bunch of lawyers. IIRC, somebody brought up a little-used part of the *kidnapping* statue that says something to the effect of "binding or restraining a limb against a person's will", and the finger counts as a limb. Kidnapping, of course, is a federal offense -- bit of a stretch, I guess, but how awesome would it be to send this guy to FPYITA prison for this?

Anyway, I missed a fair bit of the original coverage -- how exactly did the finger get in this guy's food to begin with? I mean, I assume its owner knew what had happened to it, right? Just curious.

You only use the word "fuck" one time on your main page. F'n isn't a good replacement. Stop whoring for a spot on CNN's blog report!

Does anyone think there will ever come a time when the public, who are then selected for jury duty, are so damned sick of this type of bullshit litigation that they don't cave and give these wastes of skin anything but 'the finger'? If juries and judges stop awarding every whiney-assed leach for being a pussy, a fraud, and a sick opportunist, maybe this kind of shit will stop. My guess is no and it's only going to get worse. People are no longer being held accountable for anything. It's all about ego and what I can get and how easily I can get it.

I don't remember the percentage, but I thought it was outrageously high, of idiots who are planning their retirement based upon winning the flippin' lottery!

So you find something in your food. Ask for a replacement, get some f'n coupons and get over it.

I realize I'm preaching to the chior. Amen.

Compos - it's already happening.

Juries are not really as generous as they're made out to be. Sure, there's an occasional crap case. But there are a LOT of defense verdicts for BS cases. I live in SF, which supposedly has some of the most generous juries in the world, and all the BS cases I've seen tried, the jury was pretty sensible.

"Soft tissue injury" personal injury suits, for instance, are a tough one to win, because it's something that you can't prove with certainty. Saw one jury trial here in SF, which supposedly has some of the most generous juries in the world, where the plaintiff wanted several thousand more than the insurance company was offering to cover pain & suffering from soft tissue injury. The insurance company was sticking with the lowball offer for property damage and a little bit for his medical treatement - getting X-rayed or whatever. Liability wasn't contested. He got awarded less than what the insurance company had offered in settlement.

Saw another employment discrimination trial that went on for 4 weeks. She'd been fired from a management position at a big corporation; she claimed it was because of an old boys' club environment and retaliation for her speaking out about it. Oh yeah, age discrimination too. Defense came back with multiple reports about her being difficult to work with, abrasive, and abusive of subordinates & clients, and testimony that they tried to find a place for her with little client contact so they could could keep her, but it didn't work out. Four weeks of this testimony. She sought over $1M, on about 8 different causes of action. Liberal SF jury; big deep-pocket corporate defendant; should have been easy money for her, right?

Total defense verdict. She didn't get a penny. The jury pretty much figured the case was BS and she was just out for cash, and I'm pretty sure they were pissed off at being stuck in jury duty for a BS case like that.

Don't believe the hype. There are sensible people in jury pools too.

One imagines a similar scenario to "What does a yellow light mean?"

You know... where the cop says "Give him the finger" "Well, OK....: (bird)

"No, I mean give him the FINGER..."

"Well, OK..... (two birds)"

I hope the kid counter-sues and the judge buries his foot in this jerk's ass.

If I give you my property by accident and you refuse to return it to me you are in illegal possession of it. There must be some "body" of law governing body parts for donation and scientific purposes and the possession and transfer thereof. There should be some way to make such a case.

Alex - thanks. That's good. Makes me feel a little better about some of my fellow humans.

I still don't see it causing people to take responsibility for their own actions and I don't see it keeping slime from going after big corporations just because they think they can make a profit.

Sometimes I think I need to hermitize myself, sit on the front porch with a couple of dogs and a double-barrel full of rock salt.

72 - I understand what you are saying. My question is do we really need a damned law for something as straight forward as this? No offense to lawyers, I know some good ones, but goddamn!

This kid loses the end of his finger, has no idea where it went. Think of the bit of relief when he learned someone found it. Then the opportunistic prick won't give it back so the kid can potentially have it sewn back on! Why do we need written documentation of the proper way to handle this situation?!

If this hyena doesn't have his teeth kicked in, then hypotheticallyhe gets away with the same thing as if I were skydiving and my chute doesn't open and I
go all tomahawk missile on a farmer's cow. He doesn't have to turn my mangled corpse over to my grieving family because my splattered guts and material from my bowels is all over his barnyard and it's all evidence that I damaged his property. I caused him loss of income, loss of future income through breeding, hair loss, erectile disfunction, his wife is unhappy and his kids are traumatized and can't sleep because pieces of my ass are stuck to the outside of their bedroom window.

Is there insurance for that kind of thing by the way?

COMPOS MENTOS

Why do we need written documentation of the proper way to handle this situation?!

We don't if the judge is sharp and wants to make new case law. But even defining a severed finger for legal purposes raises problems, e.g., is it personal property, and if so what category of the personal property code does it fall under? Judicial decisions are based upon statute and precedent and judges are loathe (or at least they should be) to make up new law as the go along. In the "body" of law dealing with donation, possession and transfer of human body parts, the definitions and concepts are already there making it easy to simply apply them to this case. But the bottom line is that no matter how he got the finger, when he refused to give it back after being notified who's it was and that they wanted it back, he was in illegal possession of it.

BTW I agree with you that there isn't enough respect for each other anymore in this country and that too many people hide behind the law. There was a time when if someone tried such a thing, the guys friends and relatives would get together and twist that scumbags arm until he gave it up. And the local judge would've told the scumbag to get out of his courtroom before he had him arrested for contempt for trying to charge them or sue them.

I'm afraid De Toqueville's "spider web of petty rules, regulations and laws" has truly descended on us all and has made us a bunch fearful, compliant sheep, or as Micheal Savage calls us:

We the Sheeple

TYPICAL REPUBLICAN BEHAVIOR.

This guy is still a fat slug. Isn't that an automatic ruling against him? Just wondering.

The jerk should lose his own finger after all the bible says a eye for a eye i mean why did he even want to keep another persons severed digit? he is a goul and a beast i say his same finger should be amputed