If you read the very first sentence of the article, it says that the lawsuit is a "class action lawsuit". Now I'm no lawyer but I know that a class action lawsuit means that the lawsuit is on behalf of a larger party. In this particular lawsuit, I would think that it would mean that the lawsuit is in defense of any person who has ever purchased a reeses product.
Here is the filed legal document of the document. Turn to page 12. https://interactive.wtsp.com/pdfs/hershey-lawsuit-PACER.pdf
The filed lawsuit document says that the lawsuit is on behalf of "All consumers within the State of Florida who purchased one of Products, as detailed herein, within the statute of limitations period". This means that if the lawsuit is successful, anyone in the state of Florida who has purchased a reeses product within the statute of limitation will be entitled to receive compensation. In conclusion, I believe that the lawsuit isn't "just looking for a way to make some money", because the lawsuit is meant to compensate every person who was duped by a reeses product.
What you said was incredibly reactionary. The narrative that people are trying to get rich on frivolous lawsuits was Reaganist policy. Tort law reform is a core principle of the Republican party. Right wingers have propagandized people into believing that consumer protection lawsuits are bad because they don't want capitalists to be able to face legal consequences.
Im uset they need lawyers for that. It clearly does not match, whty sdo we need to deliberate at all, just hang the guy in charge of the false advertising to set an examole and be done with it.
On one hand, that is weak of Hershey.
On the other, actual human beings got so upset about it that they hired lawyers to file a lawsuit over it? Some people need to get out more.
I imagine they aren't actually that upset and are just looking for a way to make some money?
If you read the very first sentence of the article, it says that the lawsuit is a "class action lawsuit". Now I'm no lawyer but I know that a class action lawsuit means that the lawsuit is on behalf of a larger party. In this particular lawsuit, I would think that it would mean that the lawsuit is in defense of any person who has ever purchased a reeses product.
Here is the filed legal document of the document. Turn to page 12. https://interactive.wtsp.com/pdfs/hershey-lawsuit-PACER.pdf
The filed lawsuit document says that the lawsuit is on behalf of "All consumers within the State of Florida who purchased one of Products, as detailed herein, within the statute of limitations period". This means that if the lawsuit is successful, anyone in the state of Florida who has purchased a reeses product within the statute of limitation will be entitled to receive compensation. In conclusion, I believe that the lawsuit isn't "just looking for a way to make some money", because the lawsuit is meant to compensate every person who was duped by a reeses product.
What you said was incredibly reactionary. The narrative that people are trying to get rich on frivolous lawsuits was Reaganist policy. Tort law reform is a core principle of the Republican party. Right wingers have propagandized people into believing that consumer protection lawsuits are bad because they don't want capitalists to be able to face legal consequences.
Im uset they need lawyers for that. It clearly does not match, whty sdo we need to deliberate at all, just hang the guy in charge of the false advertising to set an examole and be done with it.