Man sues BofA for "1,784 billion, trillion dollars"

[Graham2001]

Why do you Americans allow paranoid schizophrenics to submit lawsuits?

Dalton Chiscolm is unhappy about Bank of America's customer service -- really, really unhappy.

Chiscolm sued the largest U.S. bank and its board, demanding that "1,784 billion, trillion dollars" be deposited into his account the next day. He also demanded an additional $200,164,000, court papers show.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-...llion-dollars/

[Mickey Blue]

If this works I have plans for Chase bank.. You are all welcome to spend time on my floating island paradise come next year.

-MB

[Roadie]

Originally Posted by Graham2001

Why do you Americans allow paranoid schizophrenics to submit lawsuits?

Is there a psychological test in other countries prior to submitting a lawsuit? Because "us Americans" don't have one.

[llewtrah]

Originally Posted by Roadie

Is there a psychological test in other countries prior to submitting a lawsuit? Because "us Americans" don't have one.

No psychological test here, but this would be considered a frivolous case and not proceed.

I guess the answer is because as long as USAnian lawyers are getting paid by the client, they'll sue anyone up to and including $deity.

[Roadie]

Originally Posted by llewtrah

No psychological test here, but this would be considered a frivolous case and not proceed.

I guess the answer is because as long as USAnian lawyers are getting paid by the client, they'll sue anyone up to and including $deity.

If you read the article, I think you'd see that this case is not likely to proceed here in the good old USA, either.

[snopes]

Originally Posted by llewtrah

No psychological test here, but this would be considered a frivolous case and not proceed.

As it is here:

"Judge Chin gave Chiscolm until October 23 to better explain the basis for his claims, or else see his complaint dismissed."

[Roadie]

And, with one small Google search, the court filing shows he's pro se, so there's no "USAnian" lawyer getting paid anything.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by llewtrah

I guess the answer is because as long as USAnian lawyers are getting paid by the client, they'll sue anyone up to and including $deity.

In addition to what the others have said, Chiscolm is doing this pro se, so you can't blame lawyers. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_299999.html

[llewtrah]

"Pro se" isn't a term I've come across here (a quick Google shows it to be a USAnian thing). In England and Wales the equivalent seems to be "litigant in person".

[keokuk]

Originally Posted by llewtrah

No psychological test here, but this would be considered a frivolous case and not proceed.

The same will probably happen here. See the last paragraph: "Judge Chin gave Chiscolm until October 23 to better explain the basis for his claims, or else see his complaint dismissed."

I guess the answer is because as long as USAnian lawyers are getting paid by the client, they'll sue anyone up to and including $deity.

According to Judge Chin's order, the plaintiff filed pro se. There was no lawyer getting paid for this suit.

ETA: Spanked by everyone. Should have read the rest of the thread before responding.

[Roadie]

Originally Posted by llewtrah

"Pro se" isn't a term I've come across here (a quick Google shows it to be a USAnian thing). In England and Wales the equivalent seems to be "litigant in person".

What is United States of Americanian, anyway?

[llewtrah]

Originally Posted by Roadie

What is United States of Americanian, anyway?

USAnian - person who lives in USA
American - person who lives in the continents of America

I feel it impolite to use "American" (America being a landmass) when referring only to something USAnian (a country that occupies only part of that landmass). It's a well-recognised neologism.

[Roadie]

I am not a United States of Americanian. Why is it not USAn?

[Not_Done_Living]

Maybe he is hoping for a settlement.. even if he was only offered a token 1% plus court costs.....

[mags]

Originally Posted by llewtrah

USAnian - person who lives in USA
American - person who lives in the continents of America

I feel it impolite to use "American" (America being a landmass) when referring only to something USAnian (a country that occupies only part of that landmass). It's a well-recognised neologism.

Well recognized, perhaps, but still annoying. America isn't "a landmass" it is two continents, spanning into two hemispheres. North American or South American, or even Central American are perfectly fine ways of referring to someone from one of the continents over here. If you want to be more specific in North America, Canadian or Mexican are perfectly fine ways to refer to someone from the other countries. We are the only ones with the word America in the name of our country, so believe me, no one who lives in these two continents is confused when the word American is used. There is no reason for anyone to make up a new (unpronounceable) word to specify someone from the United States, because American is already perfectly well understood. I guess some might think it unfair that we use the name of the continents as part of the name of our citizens (although oddly enough the only people I've ever seen use it are not from any part of the American continents), but we have for over 200 years, and it hasn't been confusing to people all that time (or any of that time as far as I know).

I think the term USAian or USAn or USAan (I've seen all used) is at best misguided, and at worst condescending.

[Lainie]

Originally Posted by llewtrah

"Pro se" isn't a term I've come across here (a quick Google shows it to be a USAnianIn England and Wales the equivalent seems to be "litigant in person".

It's a Latin thing. Many legal terms in the US are Latin.

[lord_feldon]

Originally Posted by mags

I think the term USAian or USAn or USAan (I've seen all used) is at best misguided, and at worst condescending.

I don't mind it so much until it comes with a snide explanation of how it's "impolite" to use anything else, as well as a statement that the only proper definition of "America" is the secondary definition.

[Lainie]

Originally Posted by lord_feldon

I don't mind it so much until it comes with a snide explanation of how it's "impolite" to use anything else, as well as a statement that the only proper definition of "America" is the secondary definition.

Or with an ignorant, insulting, and completely unsupported assumption about our legal system.

[Mosherette]

Originally Posted by mags

I think the term USAian or USAn or USAan (I've seen all used) is at best misguided, and at worst condescending.

OTOH, I've been roundly berated by a Canadian person (not on here) in the past for using the term "American" to refer to someone from the USA. I've used USAn on message boards since.

[Christie]

Originally Posted by Mosherette

OTOH, I've been roundly berated by a Canadian person (not on here) in the past for using the term "American" to refer to someone from the USA. I've used USAn on message boards since.

That Canadian person certainly wasn't speaking for the majority of Canadians by any means. Calling Americans, Americans is the norm here and it's only those with some kind of axe to grind who do things any differently.