TOP 7 FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS
1. MAN VS.HIMSELF
In 1995 Robert Lee Brock, a prisoner in Virginia, wished to be removed from prison and placed in a mental institution. In order to achieve his goal, he decided to sue himself. He claimed that his crime was committed while he was drunk, which was a violation of his religious beliefs. He claimed that he had violated his own civil liberties. He sued himself for five million but to make matters worse, he claimed that the state should pay as he was behind bars and without an income. Thankfully the case was dismissed and Brock didn’t get his transfer.
2. DUKES FAMILY VS. KILLER WHALE
In 1999, Daniel Dukes, a twenty-seven-year-old from Florida, hatched a clever plot so that he could have his lifelong dream of swimming with a whale fulfilled. He hid from the security guards at Sea World and managed to stay in the park after closing. Shortly after, he dived into the tank containing a killer whale— fulfilling his dream. Daniel was killed by the whale. His parents proceeded to sue Sea World because they did not display public warnings that a killer whale (named Tillikum in this instance) could kill people. They also claimed that the whale was wrongly portrayed as friendly because of the stuffed toys sold there.
3. HOLY ROLLER VS. MAGICIANS
This is a true case of believing it or not. Christopher Roller, a resident of Minnesota, sued David Blaine and David Copperfield, demanding they reveal their secret magic tricks to him. He demanded 10 percent of their total income for life. The reason for the suit is that Roller believes that the magicians are defying the laws of physics, and thereby using godly powers. But it gets worse. The roller is suing not just because the magicians are using God’s powers he is suing because he thinks he is God and, therefore, it is his powers they are stealing.
4. MADER A CITY VS. TASERS
Marcy Noriega, a California police officer, decided to take a suspect in the back of her car when he became uncontrollable and started kicking at the windows. Noriega drew her taser from her belt and fired it at the man. Unfortunately for the crook, the officer had accidentally drawn her gun instead, and she shot him in the chest, killing him. The city is now suing the taser company, arguing that any reasonable officer could mistakenly draw and shoot their gun instead of their taser. They are suing for the full costs of the wrongful death lawsuit that the man’s family has filed against the city.
5. PETA VS. DIVISION OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
PETA, the often-insane animal-loving organization, held an anti-hunt protest in 2001 defending the rights of deer to live. On the way home from the protest, two members hit a deer that had run onto the highway. The members informed the New Jersey Division of Fish and Wildlife that they intended to sue for damages and injuries. In their letter, they stated that the Division was responsible for the damages “as a result of their deer management program, which includes, in certain circumstances, an affirmative effort to increase the deer population.”
6. WOMAN VS. ACT OF GOD
We all know that weather reports are frequently wrong and we take that into account when planning our days, but this was not the case for an Israeli woman who sued a TV station for making an inaccurate prediction. The station predicted good weather but it rained. The woman claimed that the forecast caused her to dress lightly, resulting in her catching the flu, missing a week of work, and spending money on medication. She further claimed that the whole incident caused her stress. She sued for one thousand dollars and won.
7. COMMON SENSE VS. MCDONALD’S
In 1992, a seventy-nine-year-old Albuquerque woman (Stella Liebeck) bought a coffee from a McDonald’s drive-through. Her grandson was driving and he parked the car so she could add cream and sugar to the drink. She put the cup between her knees and pulled the lid toward her; inevitably the coffee spilled onto her lap. She sued McDonald’s for negligence because she claimed the coffee was too hot to be safe. Unbelievably the jury found that McDonald’s was 80 percent responsible for the incident and they awarded Liebeck $160,000 in compensatory damages. But it gets worse: they awarded her $2.7 million in punitive damages! The decision was appealed and the two parties ultimately ended up settling out of court for a sum of less than $600,000.