Monster Media 1993 #2/Image.iso/magazine/rah9308r.zip/6

Text File | 1993-08-01 | 11KB | 190 lines

Product Liability Suit
author unknown

{Ed. note:  This little ditty has been floating around the
  humor conferences lately.  It's a real scream for Looney
  Tunes fans.  The copy obtained had gaps in the text, which
  have been filled in by the editor, who is *not* a lawyer. }

In The United States District Court,
Southwestern District, Tempe, Arizona
Case No. B19293, Judge Joan Kujava, Presiding

Wile E. Coyote, Plaintiff
-v.-
Acme Company, Defendant

Opening statement of Mr. Harold Schoff, attorney for Mr. Coyote:

My client, Mr. Wile E. Coyote, a resident of Arizona and contiguous
states, does hearby bring suit for damages against the Acme Company,
manufacturer and retail distributor of assorted merchandise,
incorporated in Delaware and doing business in every state, district,
and territory.  Mr. Coyote seeks compensation for personal injuries,
loss of business income, and mental suffering caused as a direct
result of the actions and/or gross negligence of said company, under
Title 15 of the United States Code Chapter 47, section 2072,
subsection (a), relating to product liability.

Mr. Coyote states that on eighty-five separate occasions he has
purchased of the Acme Company (hereinafter, "Defendant"), through
that company's mail-order department, certain products which did
cause him bodily injury due to defects in manufacture or improper
cautionary labelling.  Sales slips made out to Mr. Coyote as proof of
purchase are at present in the possession of the Court, marked
Exhibit A.  Such injuries sustained by Mr. Coyote have temporarily
restricted his ability to make a living in the profession of
predator.  Mr. Coyote is self-employed and thus not eligible for
Workmen's Compensation.

Mr. Coyote states that on December 13th he received of Defendant via
parcel post one Acme Rocket Sled.  The intention of Mr. Coyote was to
use the Rocket sled to aid him in pursuit of his prey.  Upon receipt
of the Rocket Sled Mr. Coyote removed it from its wooden shipping
crate and sighting his prey in the distance, activated the ignition.
As Mr. Coyote gripped the handlebars, the Rocket Sled accelerated
with such sudden and precipitate force as to stretch Mr. Coyote's
forelimbs to a length of fifteen feet.  Subsequently, the rest of Mr.
Coyote's body shot forward with a violent jolt, causing severe strain
to his back and neck and placing him unexpectedly astride the Rocket
Sled.  Disappearing over the horizon at such speed as to leave a
diminishing jet trail along its path, the Rocket Sled soon brought
Mr. Coyote abreast of his prey.  At that moment the animal he was
pursuing veered sharply to the right.  Mr. Coyote vigorously
attempted to follow this maneuver but was unable to, due to poor
design and engineering on the Rocket Sled and a faulty or nonexistent
steering system.  Shortly thereafter, the unchecked progress of the
Rocket Sled led it and Mr. Coyote into collision with the side of a
mesa.

Paragraph One of the Report of Attending Physician (Exhibit B),
prepared by Dr. Ernst Grosscup, M.D., D.O., details the multiple
fractures, contusions, and tissue damage suffered by Mr. Coyote as a
result of this collision.  Repair of the injuries required a full
bandage around the head (excluding the ears), a neck brace, and full
or partial casts on all four legs.  Hampered by these injuries, Mr.
Coyote was nevertheless obliged to support himself.  With this in
mind, he purchased of Defendant as an aid to mobility one pair of
Acme Rocket Skates.  When he attempted to use this product, however,
he became involved in an accident remarkably similar to that which
occurred with the Rocket Sled.  Again, Defendant sold over the
counter, without caveat, a product which attached powerful jet
engines (in this case, two) to inadequate vehicles, with little or no
provision for passenger safety.

Encumbered by his heavy casts, Mr. Coyote lost control of the Rocket
Skates soon after strapping them on, and collided with a roadside
billboard so violently as to leave a hole in the shape of his full
silhouette.

Mr. Coyote states that on occasions too numerous to list in this
document he has suffered mishaps with explosives purchased of
Defendant: the Acme "Little Giant" Firecracker, the Acme Self-Guided
Aerial Bomb, etc. (For a full listing, see the Acme Mail Order
Explosives Catalog and attached deposition, entered in evidence as
Exhibit C.)  Indeed, it is safe to say that not once has an explosive
purchased of Defendant by Mr. Coyote performed in an expected manner.
To cite just one example: At the expense of much time and personal
effort, Mr. Coyote constructed around the outer rim of a butte a
wooden trough beginning at the top of the butte and spiralling
downward around it to some few feet above a black X painted on the
desert floor.  The trough was designed in such a way that a spherical
explosive of the type sold by Defendant would roll easily and swiftly
down to the point of detonation indicated by the X.  Mr. Coyote
placed a generous pile of birdseed directly on the X, and then,
carrying the spherical Acme Bomb (Catalog #78 climbed to the top of
the butte.  Mr. Coyote's prey, seeing the birdseed, approached, and
Mr. Coyote proceeded to light the fuse.  In an instant the fuse
burned down to the stem, causing the bomb to detonate.

In addition to reducing all Mr. Coyote's careful preparations to
naught, the premature detonation of Defendant's product resulted in
the following disfigurements to Mr. Coyote:

1.  Severe singeing of the hair on the head, neck, and muzzle.
2. Sooty discoloration.  3. Fracture of the left ear at the stem,
causing the ear to dangle in the aftershock with a creaking noise.
4.  Full or partial combustion of whiskers, producing kinking,
frazzling, and ashy disintegration.  5. Radical widening of the eyes,
due to brow and lid charring.

We come now to the Acme Spring-Powered Shoes.  The remains of a pair
of these purchased by Mr. Coyote on June 23rd are Plaintiff's Exhibit
D.  Selected fragments have been shipped to the metallurgical
laboratories of the University of California at Santa Barbara for
analysis, but to date, no explanation has been found for this
product`s sudden and extreme malfunction.

As advertised by Defendant, this product is simplicity itself: two
wood-and-metal sandals, each attached to milled-steel springs of high
tensile strength and compressed in a tightly coiled position by a
cocking device with a lanyard release. Mr. Coyote believed that this
product would enable him to pounce upon his prey in the initial
moments of the chase, when swift reflexes are at a premium.

To increase the shoes' thrusting power still further, Mr. Coyote
affixed them by their bottoms to the side of a large boulder.
Adjacent to the boulder was a path which Mr. Coyote's prey was known
to frequent.  Mr. Coyote put his hind feet in the wood-and-metal
sandals and crouched in readiness, his right forepaw holding firmly
to the lanyard release.  Within a short time Mr. Coyote`s prey did
indeed appear on the path coming toward him.  Unsuspecting, the prey
stopped near Mr. Coyote, well within range of the springs at full
extension. Mr. Coyote gauged the distance with care and proceeded to
pull the lanyard release.

At this point, Defendant's product should have thrust Mr. Coyote
forward and away from the boulder.  Instead, for reasons yet unknown,
the Acme Spring-Powered Shoes thrust the boulder away from Mr.
Coyote.  As the intended prey looked on unharmed, Mr. Coyote hung
suspended in the air.  Then the twin springs recoiled, bringing Mr.
Coyote to a violent feet-first collision with the boulder, the full
weight of his head and forequarters falling upon his lower
extremities.

The force of this impact then caused the springs to rebound,
whereupon Mr. Coyote was thrust skyward.  A second recoil and
collision followed.  The boulder, meanwhile, which was roughly ovoid
in shape, had begun to bounce down a hillside, the coiling and
recoiling of the springs adding to its velocity.  At each bounce, Mr.
Coyote came into contact with the boulder, or the boulder came into
contact with Mr. Coyote, or both came into contact with the ground.
As the grade was a long one, this process continued for some time.

The sequence of collisions resulted in systemic physical damage to
Mr. Coyote, viz, flattening of the cranium, sideways displacement of
the tongue, reduction of length of legs and upper body, and
compression of vertebrae from base of tail to head.  Repetition of
blows along a vertical axis produced a series of regular horizontal
folds in Mr. Coyote's body tissues-- a rare and painful condition
which caused Mr. Coyote to expand upward and contract downward
alternately as he walked, and to emit an off-key, accordionlike
wheezing with every step.  The distracting and embarrassing nature of
this symptom has been a major impediment to Mr. Coyote's pursuit of a
normal social life.

As the court is no doubt aware, Defendant has a virtual monopoly of
manufacture and sale of goods required by Mr. Coyote's work.  It is
our contention that Defendant has used its market advantage to the
detriment of the consumer of such specialized products as itching
powder, giant kites, Burmese tiger traps, anvils, and two-hundred-
foot-long rubber bands.  Much as he has come to mistrust Defendant's
products, Mr. Coyote has no other domestic source of supply to which
to turn.  One can only wonder what our trading partners in Western
Europe and Japan would make of such a situation, where a giant
company is allowed to victimize the consumer in the most reckless and
wrongful manner over and over again.

Mr. Coyote respectfully requests that the Court regard these larger
economic implications and assess punitive damages in the amount of
seventeen million dollars.  In addition, Mr. Coyote seeks actual
damages (missed meals, medical expenses, days lost from professional
occupation) of one million dollars; general damages (mental
suffering, injury to reputation) of twenty million dollars; and
attorney's fees of seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars.  By
awarding Mr. Coyote the full amount, this Court will censure
Defendant, its directors, officers, shareholders, successors, and
assigns, in the only language they understand, and reaffirm the right
of the individual predator to equal protection under the law.   {RAH}