10 Retarded Lawsuits

[Guest Boo_Bradley]

10.) Holy Flaming Pastries, Batman! Allstate, like most insurance companies, does not enjoy paying out claims to policyholders who suffer losses, but they upped the corporation-desperation ante recently by dragging food maker Kraft into court during a dispute over a home fire. Allstate claimed that Kraft's "Toastette" pastries are flammable and dangerous and caused the fire that burned the house that Allstate insured, and now does not want to pay out on.

 

9.) Grandma's "Lazy Susan." Mega-retailer Wal-Mart sued shrinking rival K-Mart in Federal court over little rotating carousels that hold plastic bags at the checkout lane. A Federal lawsuit. Over the little bag holder thing. Wal-Mart claims a patent on the rotating bag holder (A metal rack, a bearing. . . A patent?) and is intent on clogging up our court system and wasting huge amounts of taxpayer's money to make certain that K-Mart shoppers are left without rotating plastic bags. No word on whether Wal-Mart's patent battle will reach the millions of 'lazy susan' rotating cracker trays, soup shelves and spice racks that sit in everyone's grandmother's kitchen. Have Granny notify her legal counsel, just in case.

 

8.) Bulldozers attacked by fuzzy critters! Heavy equipment maker Caterpillar, Inc has sued Disney to block the filmmaker's release of their latest live-action children's tale, George of the Jungle 2. Caterpillar claims that the Disney film about wild animals trying to defend their jungle homes might injure the reputation of bulldozers and other equipment Caterpillar makes. Good thing it's too late for Winchester to stop the release of Bambi!

 

7.) More flammable breakfast foods. Allstate insurance seems to have found a hobby (see # 10). The huge corporation is suing the Kellogg corporation alleging that Pop-Tarts are also dangerously flammable and that Kellogg, and not Allstate, ought to pay for damage to burned homes that Allstate was hired to insure. These suits are clogging up courts and costing us all money in at least three states: Ohio, New Jersey and the similar "flaming foods" case in Michigan, above. Beware of Pop Tarts of mass destruction!

 

6.) We have ways of making you buy our music. As music sharing becomes more popular, the recording industry worries that customers might balance the questionable ethics of file swapping against feeding their bloated corporate coffers. So in a sly public relations move, the RIAA began suing their own customers: school kids, working families and college students, wasting millions of taxpayer's dollars and clogging up courts in all fifty states. In two infamous cases, the RIAA strong-armed a 12-year-old-girl and her mom into paying $2,000 under threat of a Federal lawsuit, and RIIA was forced to drop their suit against a 66-year-old-grandmother who didn't even own a computer capable of file swapping. Way to make friends, RIAA. It's all about the music.

 

5.) Fight for our right. . . to lie. The U.S. Supreme Court voted to dismiss an appeal from controversial athletic wear corporation, Nike, based on Nike's pursuit of its sacred right to lie to the public. The California Supreme Court had ruled that Nike violated a consumer protection law by publicizing "false and misleading information" about its use of abusive sweatshop labor in poor countries. (Around my house we call it lying. "Dad! Sally said false and misleading things about who stole the cookies!") Nike raised what the court called "novel constitutional questions" by claiming that if it had to follow the law and be honest that would hurt their business and their public relations activities. Poor Nike! Wasting millions on silly corporate suits in pursuit of dishonesty? Just do it!

 

4.) The bird is mine! Kellogg's imaginary Froot Loops bird Toucan Sam is responsible for clogging up some very real courts and wasting some very real taxpayers' money. "Sam," through his corporate owners, Kellogg, sued a local golf course, Toucan Golf, Inc., for having the temerity to use its own name and a picture of an actual toucan on its logo. (Note to cereal corporations: these animals exist outside your advertising campaigns.) Luckily, the U.S. Federal Courts were on the job and informed the animated character and its corporate backers that real toucans existed first and golf courses have little to do with selling sugary children's cereal. Case dismissed.

 

3.) "Bimbo" Barbie a loser. The U.S. Supreme Court rejected an appeal from the manufacturer of everyone's favorite role model for young girls, Mattel, over allegations that a 1997 pop song by the techno group Aqua referred to the well-endowed plastic toy as a "bimbo." That means that the Barbie the Bimbo lawsuit spent five years clogging up the court system, crowding out cases by injured people and grieving families, soaking up hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars, before being dropped. Mattel, Inc. reportedly makes $1.5 billion dollars each year from the non-bimbo doll and its huge line of accessory swag. But in fairness to Mattel, the record corporation that issued the bimbo song engaged in some court clogging of its own and counter-sued Barbie for defamation after Mattel referred to the music maker as a "bank robber."

 

2.) Get Tony. What is with these toy and cereal makers? Tony the Tiger, icon of Kellogg's Frosted Flakes cereal, is on the court docket thanks to the Hasbro toy corporation. Hasbro sued over allegations that a cereal box game featuring Tony looked too much like some long forgotten game that Hasbro made in the 1960s. The whole mess also involves the huge "Finding Nemo" Disney empire and various other obscenely wealthy corporate entities and their rights and entitlements to various over-hyped pretend children's characters. Remember kids. . . it's not dumb to waste money and clog up the courts: It's Grrrr-eat!

 

Our Winner!

 

1) Get the devil out of our courts! Billion-dollar soap making rivals Amway and Proctor & Gamble have been bogging down our courts for seven years and wasting millions of dollars over weird allegations that mega-corporate Proctor & Gamble is Satanic, and/or that ultra-conservative Amway is spreading rumors that P&G is Satanic. This fall, a Federal Court tossed out the latest suit and the judge, frustrated by the ridiculous lawsuits, told the two endlessly bickering corporations what he though of their wasteful ways:

 

:Although no decision from this court—or any other, we predict—will end the hatred these two corporate giants harbor for each other. . . we hope that they will consider the impact of their continuing legal battle on the scarce resources of the courts, and decide to concentrate their creative talents on the more traditional method of gaining competitive advantage and declare a ceasefire in the judicial arena."

 

Noting the weird nature of the dispute, the court added, ". . .recitation of the extensive and hate-filled history between P&G and Amway would take a writing as long as both the old and new testaments. . ."

 

Special Hypocrite (Dis)Honorable Mentions:

 

1. Iowa lawmaker Ron Wieck. Wieck, of Sioux City, was a corporate crusader on a mission: to limit citizens' access to the courts, grabbing his pen and passing a law that severely limited the jury trial rights of ordinary families. Wieck hated those darn Constitutionally-protected lawsuits. . . until a homeowner's dog bit him while he was banging on doors during his campaign for re-election. Then, of course, he ran right down to the courthouse and filed suit. Even fellow lawmakers called him a "hypocrite." Hope the doggy can afford Johnny Cochran.

 

2. Ted Nugent. Rocker Nugent, previously critical of the rights of ordinary people to use the courts to seek justice, decided to flip-flop on the issue and file wasteful "scattergun" Federal suits against the city of Muskegon, Michigan, its mayor and other officials. Terrible Ted was miffed because his concert had been canceled and, it seems, concerts in places like Musgeogon are all Ted has to look forward to these days. The city felt that had no choice but to cancel the show after Nugent got booted off the radio for making racist remarks. Nugent admits using the words "nigger" and "gook" on the air, but says that using those words on live radio is not racist.

 

3. William Bennett. Shortly after being outed as a serious problem gambler, Bennett announced that he would consider lawsuits against the casinos where he gambled away millions he had earned as a crusader for morality. Why the lawsuit? The casinos had not lied to protect Bennett.

 

Final note: Everyone should have his or her day in court, even dumb corporations and hypocrites who want to limit your rights, but not their own. In fact, that is the law. Your right. In fact, that right is in our Constitution: The right to trial by jury. Even giant mega-corporations deserve the chance to bicker like divorcing spouses over issues that boggle our minds with their stupidity. They just don't have the right to deny you your rights.

 

So read these 'dumb corporate lawsuits' and laugh, but don't get the wrong idea. Don't think that anyone, even rich and foolish corporations, ought to be shoved out of our courts. Remember: "frivolous lawsuits" are created in corporate boardrooms, not courtrooms.

[justsoyouknow 0]

Nugent admits using the words "nigger" and "gook" on the air, but says that using those words on live radio is not racist.

Anyone who's seen this man in concert will tell you that he is as racist as they come. He had a nice little skit involving a picture of Sadam Hussein and a crossbow, plus he led the audience in a chant of, "We should kill all of those fucking towelheads!".

 

I enjoyed myself.

[Papacita 0]

The huge corporation is suing the Kellogg corporation alleging that Pop-Tarts are also dangerously flammable and that Kellogg, and not Allstate, ought to pay for damage to burned homes that Allstate was hired to insure.

That one brings back bad memories. I remember once when I was like about 8 or 9, I put some Pop Tarts in the toaster and left the room to watch Animaniacs...then when I came back the kitchen was on fire.

 

For another stupid law suit, in my freshman Criminal Justice class, our teacher told us a story about a guy who, after committing a crime, decided to sue Satan for forcing him to do evil. If I remember right, the case was thrown out because the courts were unclear as to who would have jurisdiction over Hell.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Regarding Bennett -- wasn't his beef that the casino didn't keep his privacy intact?...

[Highland 0]

Are they obliged to do so?

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

I think that's what the argument was, but in all actuality I don't really care – don’t want to come across like I'm going OMG-conservative-guy-being-persecuted-by-the-Liberal-Media...

[Anakin Flair 0]

Are they obliged to do so?

Well, they don't allow cameras or video recorders into casinos, so I believe so...

Unless he was on the Disassociated Person's List, in which case he broke the law by entering a casino, and video evidence (such as security cameras) could be used against you, I believe.