Law: Walmart

November 5, 2007

I’m not one of those people that hate Walmart.  I know there are a lot of people that think walmart is a symbol for all of the things that are wrong in society, but I am not one of them.  Now, to eliminate any confusion, I am also not a huge Walmart customer.  When I am at home (with access to a car) the local Walmart and the local Target are right across the street from each other.  Despit the fact that it involves me driving across an extra intersection, I go to the Target.  I don’t do this out of any moral preference or as a political statement, I just think Walmart is a nicer place to go for the same stuff. 

“What does any of this have to do with law Clegal?”  Today I came across the picture of a class action plaintiff’s feet that I have included here.

Apparently this woman, a Walmart employee, bought some flip-flops from Walmart and got chemical burns.  Judging from the picture, I’d say it would be hard to argue that 1. She doesn’t have chemical burns and 2. They aren’t from flip-flops.  Assuming she has a receipt from purchasing them or can use discovery to get a tape of her buying them or some similar documentation, it seems Walmart’s best move is to settle and settle fast.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: