Wife's nude pics on lost phone end up online

[Tinia2]

I was going to put this into weird news stories but thought this should stand on it's own:
"Wife's nude pics on lost phone end up online:
Ark. man left the phone at a McDonald's; he's now suing for $3 million"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27867839/

The follow-up shoud be rather interesting.

[Senusret I]

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by Senusret I

You said it.

[Tinia2]

Originally Posted by Senusret I

These links may have one or two:
http://technologyexpert.blogspot.com...cs-end-up.html
http://a11news.com/1053/tina-sherman/

These are rather interesting:
http://www.digitalalchemy.tv/2008/11...er-photos.html
After the distribution of her photos online, Tina Sherman started receiving strange phone calls and text messages. She and her husband were forced to move to a new home and are claiming they suffered emotional distress and damage to their reputations. They are seeking $3 million in damages. No photos of her are available anymore online.

http://www.iphonesavior.com/2008/11/...-sandwich.html
Reports indicate that Tina Sherman may have sent photos of herself in various stages of undress to her husband's cell phone, the same phone which Sherman claimed he misplaced. The lawsuit alleges that before Phillip could retrieve his cell phone from McDonalds, Tina Sherman starting receiving text messages from her husband's phone in response to her pictures. One text message stated:
“I’ve seen your pictures Tina, I liked what I saw.”
The alleged Sherman nudes are currently at the center of a massive Google search by curious gawkers wanting to view the raw proof. The Tina Sherman story has reached "Top 10 Google Trends" for the search term "Tina Sherman Nude". But you won't see this hot item featured on McDonald's dollar deal menu anytime soon. The photos were pulled down back in July, making the current Google scavenger hunt all the more futile.

And from what I have seen during a rather down, dirty and fast seach, those are the only ones anyone has been able to locate!!
Some talk about some sites that have many "pop-ups" or unknown installs.
Also some chit-chat about this being a set-up. Hummm.

[christiangirl]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

...if you are a dumbass you do not get to collect money from other people for your own dumbassery.

[UGAalum94]

I really want something to change to reflect that if you are a dumbass you do not get to collect money from other people for your own dumbassery.

If you keep embarrassing photos on your cell phone and you leave your cell phone someplace, NO ONE else is responsible for the embarrassment that you suffer.

I think McDonald's should counter sue for the right to compel this guy to have a warning tattooed on his face so that the rest of us who we are dealing with.

We all do dumb stuff. The unforgivable issue is trying to make other people pay for it.

[XSK_Diamond]

The article didn't go into detail, but if the only people who had access to the phone after he left were the employees (this is traceable), then he may have a legitimate case. That doesn't mean he can win the lawsuit, but he knows that. I'll bet he's just trying to get a settlement.

[Langox510x]

Originally Posted by XSK_Diamond

The article didn't go into detail, but if the only people who had access to the phone after he left were the employees (this is traceable), then he may have a legitimate case. That doesn't mean he can win the lawsuit, but he knows that. I'll bet he's just trying to get a settlement.

Agreed. And I honestly hope he doesn't recieve a dime, but at the same time I don't blame him for making the suit.

[XSK_Diamond]

I think he's wrong in suing McDonald's, though. I can see him bringing personal civil suits against the crew, but how he can feel that the business entity is responsible I don't know. Oh wait, yes I do. It's all about the $$$.

Originally Posted by Langox510x

Agreed. And I honestly hope he doesn't recieve a dime, but at the same time I don't blame him for making the suit.

[CrackerBarrel]

Originally Posted by XSK_Diamond

I think he's wrong in suing McDonald's, though. I can see him bringing personal civil suits against the crew, but how he can feel that the business entity is responsible I don't know. Oh wait, yes I do. It's all about the $$$.

Because the manager made his promise to secure the phone not as an individual, but in his role as a representative and agent of McDonalds.

[Langox510x]

Originally Posted by XSK_Diamond

I think he's wrong in suing McDonald's, though. I can see him bringing personal civil suits against the crew, but how he can feel that the business entity is responsible I don't know. Oh wait, yes I do. It's all about the $$$.

I'm not saying he'd be right in suing McDonald's by any means, but the fact is he has a lot more to gain monetary wise if he was to sue McDonalds the corporation. People try and play him off as stupid for trying to sue over this, but honestly I think it more shows a sign of his intelligents. He's high balling a lawsuit of $3 million more than likely knowing there’s a good change the settlement could be in the 6-7 figure range.

Is the guy ethical in suing McDonalds? Maybe not, but the fact is he's only human. If I was in his place and I knew I had a fighting chance at $3 million. Sh!t!!!

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by Tinia2

I was going to put this into weird news stories but thought this should stand on it's own:
"Wife's nude pics on lost phone end up online:
Ark. man left the phone at a McDonald's; he's now suing for $3 million"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27867839/

The follow-up shoud be rather interesting.

o.k. so why is it McDonalds fault? He was the one who forgot his phone, McDonalds didn't ask him to leave it. And why would he put nude pictures of his wife on his cell? (for everyone to see in situations like this one)

I'm glad this happened to them both and I hope he doesn't get anything from McDonalds. It's all his fault. What an idiot.

[Senusret I]

You seem to revel in people's misfortune.

I guess that's only fair because so many people revel in yours.

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by Senusret I

You seem to revel in people's misfortune.

I guess that's only fair because so many people revel in yours.

I don't consider that a misfortune, it's pure stupidity. As I said, I hope they get nothing.

[Kevin]

It's a gratuitous bailment/publication of private facts case. Usually in these things, there are some damages. Unless the man's wife is a notorious slut, he's probably entitled to something, as is the wife. Now $3 million??? I don't know anything about the Arkansas pleading code, but that could very well be a threshold amount to get on a certain docket or just a ploy to make the defense lawyers to consider a quick and private settlement... who knows which?

The legal test here is pretty easily met. What you have here is a gratuitous bailment, solely for the benefit of the bailor. The duty of care here would be that the bailee not be grossly negligent. The bailee here, as far as I can tell was not just grossly negligent, but wilfully negligent (I mean the McDonald's employee didn't just accidently brush the phone with his elbow causing the photos to be posted online)... the pictures apparently harmed their reputations, God knows what else.

This is a pretty easy verdict for the plaintiff. Probably not for $3 million, but who knows what might happen with a Fayetville jury?