Southeast News
Viewing comments for:
Fla. Woman Sues Bacardi, Claims Flaming Rum Dangerous
Southeast News • July 28, 2006
Woman sues Bacardi after allegedly burned by flaming rum
A woman who was allegedly severely burned by flaming rum during a Bacardi promotion is suing the spirits producer, claiming the product ...
Insurance Journal is not responsible for the content of the message below.
| Subject | Posted By | Posted On |
|---|---|---|
| RE: Muddy Waters | MUD | Aug 2, 2006, 12:43 pm |
| Injured by rum? | Chris | Aug 1, 2006, 2:18 pm |
| Muddy Waters | 1who knows | Aug 1, 2006, 2:05 pm |
| RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Muddy | MUD | Aug 1, 2006, 1:46 pm |
| RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Muddy | injury by rum? | Aug 1, 2006, 1:27 pm |
| RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Muddy | MUD | Aug 1, 2006, 12:47 pm |
| RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Muddy | Sam | Aug 1, 2006, 12:39 pm |
| RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Muddy | MUD | Aug 1, 2006, 12:24 pm |
| RE: RE: RE: RE: Muddy | Sam | Aug 1, 2006, 11:08 am |
| RE: RE: RE: Muddy | MUD | Aug 1, 2006, 10:59 am |
| RE: RE: RE: Muddy | MUD | Aug 1, 2006, 10:48 am |
| RE: RE: Muddy | Sam | Aug 1, 2006, 10:25 am |
| RE: Muddy | MUD | Aug 1, 2006, 9:54 am |
| RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Common sense | MUD | Aug 1, 2006, 8:47 am |
| RE: RE: RE: RE: Common sense | Chris H | Aug 1, 2006, 8:23 am |
| RE: Muddy | MUD | Aug 1, 2006, 8:20 am |
| RE: Muddy | MUD | Aug 1, 2006, 8:00 am |
| Muddy | 1whoknows | Jul 31, 2006, 8:38 pm |
| RE: Liability? Intentional acts... | Chris | Jul 31, 2006, 4:16 pm |
| RE: Common sense | MUD | Jul 31, 2006, 2:32 pm |
| RE: Common sense | Hal | Jul 31, 2006, 2:31 pm |
| RE: Idiocity... | jt | Jul 31, 2006, 2:30 pm |
| Liability | Sam | Jul 31, 2006, 2:26 pm |
| Common sense | 1who knows | Jul 31, 2006, 2:06 pm |
| Liability? | Bradley | Jul 31, 2006, 2:05 pm |
| RE: RE: RE: RE: Common sense | MUD | Jul 31, 2006, 1:37 pm |
| RE: RE: RE: Common sense | Hal | Jul 31, 2006, 12:45 pm |
| RE: RE: Common sense | Chris | Jul 31, 2006, 8:03 am |
| RE: Common sense | Hal | Jul 30, 2006, 5:59 pm |
| Common sense | Doug | Jul 30, 2006, 3:31 am |
| Fourth - alcohol's in the......? | Hal | Jul 28, 2006, 8:46 pm |
| RE: Get me a | Randall | Jul 28, 2006, 5:14 pm |
| Get me a | Doc Holiday | Jul 28, 2006, 4:01 pm |
| RE: get me a lawyer | bob laublaw | Jul 28, 2006, 3:50 pm |
| get me a lawyer | JR | Jul 28, 2006, 3:27 pm |
| License | Captain B | Jul 28, 2006, 3:11 pm |
| Buy Rum | hal | Jul 28, 2006, 3:07 pm |
| Product liability? | Chris | Jul 28, 2006, 1:49 pm |
| RE: RE: Question | Ismael Rodriguez | Jul 28, 2006, 1:17 pm |
| RE: Question | TXGuru | Jul 28, 2006, 12:53 pm |
| Idiocity... | Manycanines | Jul 28, 2006, 12:49 pm |
| Question | Curious | Jul 28, 2006, 12:47 pm |
| RE: Eye for the Obvious | Hal | Jul 28, 2006, 11:03 am |
| Eye for the Obvious | Peg | Jul 28, 2006, 10:11 am |
| Back to article | ||
Subject: RE: Liability? Intentional acts...
I guess it depends on the venue's interpretation of "expected"; as in "expected or intended from the standpoint of the insured". I have seen cases decided where the end result was not specifically intended by the insured, but the triers of fact decided that the end result could be reasonably expected. In one case, the foreperson stated that the jurors couldn't figure out how the insured could claim to have expecetd any result except the disastrous one.
If the idiot with the flaming menu was intending to light the pouring rum so that it would catch fire, I would argue that it would be reasonable to expect that the rum could catch nearby patrons on fire. It would at least warrant a reservation of rights.