http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/nationworld/articles/1229527.html

Teens' cookie deliveries crumble into $900 lawsuit
A neighbor says an anxiety attack sent her to the hospital after two girls dropped treats on her porch.
By Electa Draper
The Denver Post

Durango, Colo. -- Two teenage girls trying to perform an act of kindness for their neighbors ended up being slapped with a medical bill for $900 after one neighbor suffered an anxiety attack when they knocked on her door at 10:30 p.m. delivering homemade cookies.

The incident began July 31, 2004, when the girls, Taylor Ostergaard, 17, and Lindsey Jo Zellitti, 18, decided to skip a dance and stay home and bake cookies for their neighbors.

Big mistake.

They were successfully sued for an unauthorized cookie drop on one porch. The deliveries consisted of half a dozen chocolate chip and sugar cookies accompanied by big hearts cut out of red or pink construction paper with the message: "Have a great night." The notes were signed, "Love, The T and L Club," code for Taylor and Lindsey.

At one of the nine scattered rural homes south of Durango where they delivered cookies that night, a 49-year-old woman became so terrified by the knocks on her door around 10:30 p.m. that she called the sheriff's department. Deputies determined that no crime had been committed.

But Wanita Renea Young ended up in the hospital emergency room the next day after suffering a severe anxiety attack she thought might be a heart attack.

A Durango judge Thursday awarded Young almost $900 to recoup her medical bills. She received nothing for pain and suffering.

"The victory wasn't sweet," Young said Thursday afternoon. "I'm not gloating about it. I just hope the girls learned a lesson."

Taylor's mother, Jill Ostergaard, said her daughter "cried and cried" after Judge Doug Walker handed down his decision in La Plata County Small Claims Court.

"She felt she was being punished for doing something nice," Jill Ostergaard said.

The judge said he didn't think the girls acted maliciously, but it was pretty late at night for them to be out. He didn't award any punitive damages.

Taylor and Lindsey declined to comment Thursday, saying only that they didn't want to say anything hurtful. Young said the girls showed "very poor judgment."

Just as dusk arrived a little after 9 p.m., Taylor and Lindsey began their deliveries. They didn't stop at houses that were dark. But where lights shone, the girls figured people were awake and in need of cookies. A kitchen light was on at Young's home.

Court records contain half a dozen letters from neighbors who said they enjoyed the unexpected treats. But Young, at home with her 18-year-old daughter and elderly mother, said she saw shadowy figures who banged and banged at her door. She thought they were burglars or some neighbors she had tangled with in the past, she said.

The girls wrote letters of apology to Young, with Taylor saying in part, "I just wanted you to know that someone cared about you and your family."

The families had offered to pay Young's medical bills if she would agree to indemnify the families against future claims. Young wouldn't sign the agreement. She said the families' apologies rang false and weren't delivered in person, so she brought the matter to court.

That is just stupid. Thank goodness the judge didn't award punitive damages at the very least.

__________________
Jason Priest
1999 E430
1995 E420 - retired
1986 420SEL - retired

This Young lady has to have some guilty
concious that a knock on the door gives
her an anxiety attack.
Maybe she thought this guy was
paying her a visit.

I wonder what would happen to her if someone
rang the door bell? ?

I think she's a and deserves to be .

Louis.

Yep lawyers rule the world. I think lawsuits need to be stoped it is getting out of hand. Their has to be a way to limit lawsuits.

How about taking the money out of them? Lawyers wouldn't want to sue anymore because the money would be gone.

__________________
1999 SL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200

I'm no fan of lawyers, but, most of these stories have additional facts that are not in evidence. They are written for the express purpose of antagonizing the reader. Remember that they like to sell copy and this is the way to do it.

Most of the time the legal system works the way it was intended. The reason is the fact that an attorney will not take a case that he does not feel he can win. In this specific case, I'm truly amazed that an attorney took the case for a potential win of $900. This case would normally be turned away instantly by every attorney on the planet. This is why there must be some "circumstances" that do not appear in the article.

You do not hear of the hundreds of thousands of cases where the matter is not even brought to a judge because the value to the lawyer is too small. If there is not going to be a reasonable chance of a settlement of at least $10K, no attorney, in his right mind, will touch it.

The newspapers have a field day when they find cases where there appears to be injustice done in a courtroom. This has the effect of convincing the general public that the legal system is "out of control".

There are certainly cases that are ridiculous. The McDonalds case where the woman burned herself on hot coffee comes to mind. However, the reason that these cases are awarded much more than deserved is the fact that the jury takes the side of the plaintiff against the "big corporation". They feel that the corporation has more than enough money and giving a big chunk of it to the plaintiff is the right thing to do. In reality, the plaintiff will never see a fraction of these big awards that you hear about in the paper. The defending company will appeal it and stall it for 15 more years, if necessary, but they will NEVER pay a judgment that is way out of line. They will force the plaintiff into a reasonable settlement because the plaintiff doesn't normally have 15 years to wait. And, when has the newspaper ever reported about the actual sum that the plaintiff received? Never. You hear about the award and the verdict, but, you never hear the actual amount of the payment!

There definitely are cases that seem to defy a just result. However, they are few and far between.

Hatterasguy:

I'm a lawyer and don't rule the world, hell, I can't even rule my 300sd to stop leaking.

That's a crazy story, and the press loves 'em. I wish we all knew the real story and the complete story, but it appears lawyers weren't involved and the older lady sued for her medical bill and pain and suffering in small change court. Fortunately, it looks like the judge only awarded the bill and nothing else.

In real life, crazy lawsuits are really rare and generally are thwarted by rules, like in Florida where the lawyer and client each have to pay the other side's fees and costs for defending a frivolous lawsuit.

In Florida, some lawyers are making a killing off Lemon Law suits where the dealers refuse to help with a "lemon" car and the law allows the victim to get his lawyer paid when he wins. I see the awards and cringe, but if somebody "took the money out of the suit" lawyers wouldn't take them and the stealerships would have the upper hand every time. Now, thanks to the law, it's a lot easier to get problems resolved because the dealer's afraid of paying your fees.

It's a tough system, some abuse it, some stretch the rules, but most are legitimate people making legitimate claims and the wholesale "limiting" of lawsuits isn't the answer. If you cut those people off and limit their claims, they get hurt, lawyers don't. It's people who bring claims, not just lawyers, nobody seems to blame "those darned people burned in car fires!" it's frequently the lawyer, we're easier targets.

Hope I didn't start something, I'd rather talk about diesels.

I don't know about you, but I'd be a bit freaked out too if I got a knock on my door at 10:30 PM. Can someone explain why a 17 and 18 year old would be doing such an odd thing? Sounds completely innocent, but it's still pretty weird

I think you are wrong there. I blame the 12 mindless morons AKA the jury. When I sue McD's I am trying to get money from them. Look at some of the posts here. Americans are foolishly blinded by their love for the little guy. The attitude is that the big guy is rich and can afford it even if they ruled against him. So, they will err on the side of the little guy. Wonderful concept till they someday become the big guy.

Here is my reasoning. Lets say that I slip on your porch and decide to sue you. You look at the past and see that others in the same situation have lost $1000 and you decide to settle for $500. Sounds like a bargain because you could have lost $1000 but now it is only $500. Well the next guy brings it up to court and uses the previous cases as a precident. Not a shot has been fired in court but the settlements still go on. Just like Herpes, they are the gift that goes on giving. You know that if you go to court, the 12 morons might decide that they should side with the little guy and award him the money. After all, they know they won't hurt you since your insurance will just pay them off. Insurance companies are rich and can afford it. Victimless crime. Of course, the insurance companies will raise the rates in the background.

Look, if the 12 morons don't side with the plaintiff (assuming the issue is one which could have been avoided with common sens) the next scumbag lawywer will look at the precident and decide not to persue it seeing as how it is a dead end and they don't get paid if nothing is recovered.

So, don't blame the lawyer. All he is doing is making a living in a legal fashon. Don't blame the plaintiff, he is trying to get a few bucks. Which of us doesn't do that in some way, shape or form? You try save a few bucks bargaining with the dealership about the price of the car you are about to purchase, right? So, who does that leave? That right. The US citizens who make up the jury.

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

There has to be something else there. For the life of me I can't figure out what the cause of action is or how a heart attack is a forseeable consequence of knocking on a door.

Teenagers do strange things.
Just think back to when you where
that age, and the weird and strange/stupid
things you did.
Although 10.30pm is kinda late for delivering cookies
it isn't that late, especially during the week-end.

And according to other neighbours these kids do this
sort of thing all the time.

And if it was someone trying to break in they sure
wouldn't knock on the door first, but if they where
then turning on the porch light would have sent them
running.
This would also have shown her who was there.

But, this is how our world is righ now, call the
police and have them investigate instead of doing
a little of your own.
Such a waste of their time, they could have been
catching a real thief or murderer instead.


Louis.

There's something missing here. There was no jury because it was in small claims. The judge could me one of those small claims judges that make moronic decisions.

You never know. Did you read my post where my friend's insurance paid for the deductible on her neighbor's son's medical bills? This woman's son rode his bike down the dirt hill and almost busted his head on my friend's car. The car was parked.

Anyway my friend talked with legal at work and mentioned that she had told the kid a few times to not ride down the hill because he might get hurt if he fell or ran into her car! Legal told her that a judge might find her culpable because she knew of the risks and chose to do nothing about it. It's like putting a pool in the backyard and not fencing it.

The kids might have known something about the neighbor, that she suffered from anxiety attacks or she was just plain edgy... Plus, 10:30 at night isn't a good time to be banging on the neighbor's door.

__________________
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows - Robert A. Zimmerman

It takes a village to raise a child, didn't you know? That is because the parents want others to be the child's parents so they don't have to.

You see, this is the sort of thing I am talking about. If she took it to a jury, they would probably side with the kid seeing as how it affects the insurance companies and they are loaded to the gills. Won't hurt anybody, right? As such, would you want it to go to court? Probably not. You'd lose. So you pay up. Just like terrorism. The actual damage is insignificant. It's value is in the fear that it generates to the large population that at any time they could be next.

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

Just for some clarity . . . in civil cases you only need 10 out of 12 jurors to agree on a verdict, in some places the juries are even smaller. In jury cases, the trial judge can overturn a jury verdict which is shown to be unsupported by the evidence, or can reduce any judgment if the trial judge believes that the verdict was the result of undue passion, sympathy, and not supported by the evidence.

What typically happens in closely contested small claims is that a judge "splits the baby" by looking first at who has insurance coverage and then awarding a lesser amount to the claimant. Neither side is typically happy and generally very little out of pocket.

Why act surprised when something stupid like this shows up? Anyone watch Judge Judy or The Peoples' Court? You have the same thing... case after case. Some are legit.. others are up there on the stupid scale.