Can french fries be objects of art? That's debatable, but they sure can be objects of lawsuits!

Here's what happened when a gallery lost a pair of french fries that "were the basis of an artwork":

The artwork comprised a cross made of two golden chips, alongside two normal fries, deep-fried and not gold-leafed.

The catalogue for the original 1990 exhibition “Pommes d’Or,” described the work of artist Stefan Bohnenberger as “the metamorphosis of a profane everyday object into a sacred artwork.”

But the gallery’s reverence for the chips declined in the intervening decades, because when Bohnenberger asked for the two normal fries back last year, the Munich gallery Mosel and Tschechow could no longer find them. An incensed Bohnenberger promptly demanded damages, which the gallery refused to pay.

According to a report in news magazine Der Spiegel the court ruled that the gallery must now hand Bohnenberger €2,000 plus five percent interest from May 2010. On top of that, the gallery is being forced to pay 90 percent of the court fees.

The judge found that the gallery had neglected its duty to keep the chips safe.

What were they thinking? This could've been solved for $0.99 with a quick trip to the local McDonald's: Link - via Arbroath

Judges determined that the newspaper failed to fully test it before publication, and that if readers followed the recipe exactly, the churros had a good chance of exploding once the oil reached the suggested temperature. Grupo Copesa, which publishes the paper, said it will abide by the ruling.

Days after the recipe was published in the paper’s “Woman” magazine in 2004, hospitals around the country began treating women for burns suffered when the dough boiling in oil suddenly shot out of kitchen pots.

Link -via Arbroath

(Image credit: Flickr user cherrypatter)

Various lawsuits followed. Dimmick sued the city of Topeka over the shooting, and (possibly because of the prospect that he might get money from that suit) the Rowleys sued Dimmick last September for trespass, intrusion and negligent infliction of emotional distress. That seems to have given Dimmick the idea to sue the Rowleys, and he brought a counterclaim against them for breach of contract.

You see, Dimmick alleges that, after breaking into the Rowleys’ home with a knife and gun, they all then sat down and hashed out a deal under which they would hide him from police (the police who were right outside) for an unspecified amount of money. “Later,” he complained, “the Rowleys reneged on said oral contract, resulting in my being shot in the back by authorities.” Ergo, breach of contract.

An attorney for the Rowleys says, of course, that any contract with Dimmick is not valid. Link -via Boing Boing

Love White Castle burgers but hate their too-teeny-tiny booths? What's a steamed steamed-burger fan to do? (See what I did there?)

Here's what one self-described "not humongous but a big guy" White Castle fan did: he sued 'em under the Americans with Disabilities Act!

A devoted, 290-pound White Castle fan is steaming mad at the fast-food chain, which he says repeatedly broke promises to make the booths in his local eatery bigger.

All stockbroker Martin Kessman wants is a place at the table. But when the 64-year-old walked into the White Castle in Nanuet back in April 2009 for his usual No. 2 combo meal, he got an unpleasant surprise.

“They’re stationary booths,” he told The Post. “I’m not humongous, [but] I’m a big guy. I could not wedge myself in.”

Mortified and in pain from smacking his knee into one of the table’s metal supports, Kessman limped out of the restaurant, and later penned a complaint to corporate headquarters.

And how did White Castle respond?

White Castle replied with three “very condescending letters” -- and an offer that added insult to injury.

“In each letter was a coupon for three free hamburgers -- but the cheese was extra!” according to a lawsuit Kessman filed last week in Manhattan federal court.

Cheese was extra? That alone is worth a lawsuit! Link (yes, with photo of the guy)

(Photo above: Ben Britten/Wikipedia)

Among the exhibits filed in the case is a birthday card Garrity sent her son, who in his lawsuit sought damages because the card was “inappropriate” and failed to include cash or a check. He also alleged she failed to send a card for years or, while he was in college, care packages.

On the front of the American Greetings card is a picture of tomatoes spread across a table that are indistinguishable except for one in the middle with craft-store googly eyes attached.

“Son I got you this Birthday card because it’s just like you … different from all the rest!” the card reads. On the inside Garrity wrote “Have a great day! Love & Hugs, Mom xoxoxo.”

Children have the right to sue parents for emotional distress, but courts will only pursue a case if the parent’s behavior is “extreme or outrageous.” The Illinois court found that none of the mother’s behavior fit that description. Link -via Fark

(Unrelated image credit: Flickr user EikeR)

Victor Willis, the original lead singer of the group, filed papers this year to regain control in 2013 over his share of “Y.M.C.A.,” whose lyrics he wrote, under a copyright provision that returns ownership of creative works to recording artists and songwriters after 35 years. His claim to “Y.M.C.A.” and 32 other Village People compositions, however, is being contested by two companies that administer publishing rights to the songs.

The companies, Scorpio Music, a French business, and Can’t Stop Productions, one of its American affiliates, do not deny that Mr. Willis, who dressed as a police or naval officer in the group’s live performances, is one of the writers of several of the songs, which have made many millions of dollars. But they have asked a court in Los Angeles to deny his attempt to exercise what are known as “termination rights,” arguing, among other things, that the two companies “employed defendant Willis as a writer for hire, and he therefore has no rights” to any share of ownership of the songs.

The defense said Willis was merely one of several creators of the songs, and in some cases only translated French songs. A lawyer for the plaintiff pointed out that Mr. Willis does not speak French and that France has no Y.M.C.A.s. Link -via Breakfast Links

It's getting harder and harder to keep track of who's suing whom in the mobile phone business, so thankfully George Kokkinidis of Design Language News crafted this handy dandy chart summarizing the suers and the suees (I just made that up - it's plaintiffs sand defendants for all you lawyers).

As the saying goes, if you can't innovate, litigate! Link

Attorney Dee Miles said attorneys had Taco Bell’s "meat mixture" tested and found it contained less that 35 percent beef.

The lawsuit on behalf of Taco Bell customer and California resident Amanda Obney does not seek monetary damages, but asks the court to order Taco Bell to be honest in its advertising.

"We are asking that they stop saying that they are selling beef," Miles said. [...]

The lawsuit says that Taco Bell’s "seasoned beef" contains other ingredients, including water, wheat oats, soy lecithin, maltodrextrin, anti-dusting agent and modified corn starch.

Link – via The Daily Dish | Taco Bell defends its beef and plans a counterbeef suit. ]]> http://www.neatorama.com/2011/01/27/taco-bell-sued-over-beef-taco/feed/ 7 http://www.neatorama.com/2011/01/21/twitter-lawsuits/ http://www.neatorama.com/2011/01/21/twitter-lawsuits/#comments Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:59:26 +0000 Miss Cellania http://www.neatorama.com/?p=40813 What you Tweet can get you into trouble! Mental_floss has the stories of four high-profile lawsuits that followed a careless Tweet. One that has yet to be settled involves fashion designer Dawn Simorangkir and some Tweets by singer Courtney Love.

After the two had worked amicably together designing custom dresses for Love, the relationship soured after some disagreements over the amount of money Simorangkir charged for the clothes. At 12:55am on the morning of March 17, 2009, Love started a series of social media posts railing against Simorangkir, starting with a lengthy post on MySpace, numerous tweets throughout the rest of the day, and even hitting the comments section of the popular handcrafted product site Etsy, where Love initially discovered Simorangkir’s work. Over the course of her day-long rant, Love accused the designer of stealing, lying, being a drug dealer and addict, being a homophobe and racist, having been arrested for prostitution, and even threatened “you will end up in a circle of scorched earth hunted til your dead.”

Simorangkir made accusations of libel and breach of contract. Love countered with freedom of speech. That trial is scheduled for next month. Read about that case and three others at mental_floss. Link

The world’s most infamous cup of coffee spilled on February 27, 1992 in Albuquerque, NM. Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old grandmother, was a passenger in her grandson’s car when they drove through at a McDonald’s, and after she received her styrofoam cup of joe her grandson pulled the car forward and parked so Liebeck could mix in her cream and sugar.

Liebeck braced the cup between her knees, but when she tried to pull off the cup’s lid, the entire cup of coffee spilled into her lap. Although subsequent developments in the courtroom turned Liebeck and her case into objects of derision, it’s worth noting that she actually suffered legitimate injuries from the accident. Liebeck’s sweatpants absorbed the hot coffee and held it next to her skin, which helped lead to third degree burns on six percent of her body. Liebeck ended up spending eight days in the hospital and undergoing skin grafts to counter the effects of the burns.

But that’s only the beginning of the story. Liebeck asked McDonalds for $20,000 to cover her medical expenses and lost wages. McDonalds offered $800. That’s when the story starts to get complicated. Read the entire account of how a jury decided to award Liebeck $2.9 million when the case went to court (and that’s not even the end) at mental_floss. Link

A former manager of a McDonald’s franchise in Porto Allegre, Brazil, sued the hamburger chain for making him gain 65 pounds while he worked with them for over a dozen years. McDonald’s must pay him $17,500 as recompense for his weight gain, a Brazilian court ruled on Tuesday.

The 32-year-old man, whose identity wasn’t disclosed, complained that the company’s policy of mandatory food sampling caused him to balloon from about 155 lbs. to 231 lbs. while working at their restaurant in southern Brazil. [...]

The man said that he felt forced to taste everything on the menu to ensure the quality of the food because McDonald’s hired undercover customers to randomly visit restaurants and report back on quality.

Also, he blamed the free lunches consisting of burgers, fries and ice cream, which contributed to his excessive weight gain during the course of employment.

Judge Joao Filho agreed with the man, and issued a ruling against the company, ordering them to pay $17500 to the ex-employee.

Link – via Arbroath

The suit that Justice Wooten allowed to proceed claims that in April 2009, Juliet Breitman and Jacob Kohn, who were both 4, were racing their bicycles, under the supervision of their mothers, Dana Breitman and Rachel Kohn, on the sidewalk of a building on East 52nd Street.

At some point in the race, they struck an 87-year-old woman named Claire Menagh, who was walking in front of the building and, according to the complaint, was “seriously and severely injured,” suffering a hip fracture that required surgery. She died three weeks later.

Her estate sued the children and their mothers, claiming they had acted negligently during the accident. [...]

In legal papers, Mr. Tyrie added, “Courts have held that an infant under the age of 4 is conclusively presumed to be incapable of negligence.” (Rachel and Jacob Kohn did not seek to dismiss the case against them.)

But Justice Wooten declined to stretch that rule to children over 4. On Oct. 1, he rejected a motion to dismiss the case because of Juliet’s age, noting that she was three months shy of turning 5 when Ms. Menagh was struck, and thus old enough to be sued.

Link

What do you think? Should we be able to sue little kids for negligence?

For more baby and kid-related stuff, don’t miss our blog NeatoBambino!

Chen Xiaomei claims she was unreasonably treated by the cinema’s owners and the distributors of the film she went to see, because she was not warned there would be 20 minutes of adverts prior to the screening of the main feature. She is demanding a full refund (35 yuan), an extra 35 yuan in compensation for emotional damages and a written apology, reports the Xinhua agency.

In addition, Xiaomei is calling for the Polybona International cinema in the northern city of Xian to publish the length of advertisements on its website, in the lobby or on its customer hotline. In total, they should be less than five minutes, she says.

The film was Aftershock, a big hit in China. Chen’s lawsuit has been accepted by the People’s Court in Xian. Link
-via Arbroath

Mr Chhalotre had complained the impotence accusation “rendered him unmarriageable and sullied his prestige”.

The amount of the fine far exceeds the annual income of millions living in India.

One supposes that a charge of cruelty or adultery might have been better for his ego, if not his reputation. Link -via Arbroath

(Image credit: Flickr user Jo Christian Oterhals)

A fraction of a penny is amounting to one big headache for 99 Cents Only Stores.

Two years ago, the City of Commerce retailer — faced with rising inflation and higher costs — raised the top price of its goods to 99.99 cents from 99 cents. Company executives thought it was a clever way to increase sales while staying loyal to the chain’s love for the number 99.

But the move seems to be riling some customers who say they weren’t aware of the nearly one-cent increase and felt duped into believing they were still paying 99 cents "only." Because U.S. currency makes it impossible to pay 99.99 cents for an item, shoppers are essentially paying $1 plus tax at the cash register.

Now the company faces two class-action lawsuits that were filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court this month. The complaints allege unfair and deceptive business practices and misleading advertising.

Link – via J-Walk

If an airline loses your luggage, shouldn't it refund your baggage fee? That seems reasonable enough, so when American Airlines refuses to refund $25 fee after losing Danielle Covarrubias' bag, she decided to sue:

The class action lawsuit, filed on behalf of Covarrubias of Pierce County, Wash., is the first since American Airlines started to charge a fee for handling and transporting luggage in June 2008, according to industry experts. The airline was the first major carrier to impose such fees.

"It just goes to show you how enraged people are by the lack of common-sense regulation in the airline industry," said George Hobica, an aviation expert and creator of airfarewatchdog.com. "It doesn't make any sense at all that somebody should charge for a service and then screw up and not give you your money back."

What do you think? Is a lawsuit justified or are the lawyers just squeezing money out of a beleaguered industry?

Ray Sanchez of ABC News has the story: Link

A German court on Tuesday threw out the case of a schoolteacher against a pupil who allegedly tormented her by scrawling pictures of rabbits on the blackboard to aggravate her rabbit phobia. [...]

Witnesses had told the judge that the teacher ran sobbing out of the classroom when she saw the image of a rabbit on the blackboard. The girl denied making the drawings.

Link – via Deadspin

The next time a married man or woman glances your way, you might think twice before acting on impulse and frolicking between satin sheets. The scorned spouse could sue you.

Yes, you read that right. You, the paramour, can get hit with a lawsuit that could cost you hundreds of thousands of dollars.

They’re known as "alienation of affection" suits, when an "outsider" interferes in a marriage. The suits are allowed in seven states: Hawaii, Illinois, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina, South Dakota and Utah.

The law allowing such legal action dates back to antiquated times when a wife was considered the property of a husband. A broken-hearted hubby could go after his wife’s lover — not with a gun, but with the law.

Wayne Drash of CNN has more on the "alienation of affection" lawsuits: Link

In court papers, PepsiCo claims it first received a legal document related to the case from the North Carolina agent on Sept. 15 when a copy of a co-defendant’s letter was forwarded to Deputy General Counsel Tom Tamoney in PepsiCo’s law department. Tamoney’s secretary, Kathy Henry, put the letter aside and didn’t tell anyone about it because she was “so busy preparing for a board meeting,” PepsiCo said in its Oct. 13 motion to vacate.

Link | Image: FBI

But the 18-year-old has finally confessed she did not fall asleep, that she wanted all the stars and was “fully aware” of what Mr Toumaniantz was doing.

Ms Vlaminck told a Dutch TV crew: “I asked for 56 stars and initially adored them. But when my father saw them, he was furious. So I said I fell asleep and the that the tattooist mad made a mistake.”

Toumaniantz says he will now get written consent from clients before inking any tattoos. Link -via Arbroath

Rouslan Toumaniantz, who runs the tattoo parlour called The Tattoo Box in Courtrai, denies her claim.

He said she knew ‘exactly what she wanted’.

He added: ‘She was awake and looked into the mirror several times as the procedure was taking place.

‘The trouble all started when she went home and her father and boyfriend threw a fit.

‘They are saying things now like I doped her or hypnotised her. What rubbish!

‘She asked for 56 stars and that’s what she got.’

Vlaminck says she fell asleep during the procedure. She is seeking £8,500 to pay for tattoo removal. Link -via J-Walk Blog

In the injunction filed in Richland, Riches – who acknowledges he is receiving treatment for mental-health problems – said: “The Guinness Book of World Records have no right to publish my work, my legal masterpieces.”

Those include lawsuits against New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick, former President George W. Bush, Somali pirates, Britney Spears and Martha Stewart, according to a Wikipedia page dedicated to Riches’ litigious exploits.

He’s also filed lawsuits against Plato, Nostradamus, James Hoffa, “Various Buddhist Monks,” the Lincoln Memorial, the Eiffel Tower and Three Mile Island.

In his latest court filing, Riches wrote about how he sued Black History Month, the president of Iran and butter substitute I Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter!

Link -via Arbroath

Daily Mail (yes, I know how you guys feel about this newspaper, but they always come up with the most interesting stories …) has more on Javid’s travail and lawsuit involving said epic beard:

A Muslim police officer claims he was forced out of his job by colleagues who made fun of his beard and called him a ‘f***ing Paki’.

PC Javid Iqbal, 38, said white officers openly discussed in front of him how they were ‘ better’ than their ethnic-minority colleagues. [...]

Mr Iqbal says he was sacked after fellow-officers in Luton launched a ‘smear and witch-hunt campaign’ during which they lodged a string of complaints about his performance.

He is taking the Bedfordshire force to an employment tribunal claiming he is the victim of racial and religious discrimination and unfair dismissal.

Link – via reddit

We were reminded of that scheming today when we read about what Courthouse News Service reports may be the first federal class action based on concealment of chicken giblets. In the complaint, Perdue Farms is accused of disposing of “an enormous quantity of extra giblet parts” by a “secret practice” of stuffing extra hearts, gizzards and necks into its whole chickens, thereby “dispos(ing) of its extra giblets” and tricking customers into paying the regular per-pound price for them.[...]

But aren’t gizzards the best part? Clearly these people have never tasted a good chicken giblet gravy. Indeed, when reached for comment, Julie DeYoung, a Perdue spokeswoman, told the Law Blog: “While it is company practice not to comment on pending litigation, I can tell you the majority of our giblets complaints are about MISSING giblets. We just received the lawsuit and will review it in more detail, but we anticipate a vigorous defense.”

Link – via Offbeat

Carol J. Williams of the Los Angeles Times has the interesting legal development:

The California Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a young woman who pulled a co-worker from a crashed vehicle isn’t immune from civil liability because the care she rendered wasn’t medical.

The divided high court appeared to signal that rescue efforts are the responsibility of trained professionals. It was also thought to be the first ruling by the court that someone who intervened in an accident in good faith could be sued.

Lisa Torti of Northridge allegedly worsened the injuries suffered by Alexandra Van Horn by yanking her "like a rag doll" from the wrecked car on Topanga Canyon Boulevard.

Torti now faces possible liability for injuries suffered by Van Horn, a fellow department store cosmetician who was rendered a paraplegic in the accident that ended a night of Halloween revelry in 2004.

But in a sharp dissent, three of the seven justices said that by making a distinction between medical care and emergency response, the court was placing "an arbitrary and unreasonable limitation" on protections for those trying to help.

Link