The TRUE Stella Awards -- 2004 Winners
by Randy Cassingham
Issued 31 January 2004
Unlike the FAKE cases that have been highly circulated online for the
last several years (see
http://www.StellaAwards.com/bogus.html for
details), the following cases have been researched from public sources
and are confirmed TRUE by the ONLY legitimate source for the Stella
Awards:
www.StellaAwards.com . To confirm this copy is legitimate, see
http://www.StellaAwards.com/2004.html
You may forward this issue, so long as you send it in its entirety.
MEDIA OUTLETS: See
http://www.thisistrue.com/2004.html *BEFORE* running
the awards! (That page will have any updates and corrections, too.)
-v-
#6: The Tribune Co. of Chicago, Ill. The newspaper chain owns several
newspapers, as well as the Chicago Cubs baseball team. One of its
newspaper carriers was Mark Guthrie, 43, of Connecticut. One of its
ball players was Mark Guthrie, 38, of Illinois. The company's payroll
department mixed the two up, putting the ballplayer's paycheck into
the paper carrier's bank account. The carrier allowed them to take
back 90 percent of the improperly paid salary, and said they could
have the rest after they gave him a full accounting to ensure he not
only got his own pay, but wouldn't have any tax problems for being
paid $300,000(!) extra. The Tribune Co., rather than provide that
reasonable assurance, instead sued him for the rest of the money.
#5: "High Tech" retailer Sharper Image sells a lot of its "Ionic Breeze"
air filters. As part of a comparative review of many air filters,
Consumer Reports magazine found the "Ionic" unit was the worst
performer. SI complained, saying it didn't do a "fair" test. CU asked
what sort of test should be done, but SI never replied -- until it
sued CU. A federal judge ruled the suit not only had no merit, but was
actually an illegal attempt to squelch public discussion. SI was
ordered to pay CU $400,000 to cover its legal defense costs.
#4: Edith Morgan, mother of Kansas City Chiefs football star Derek
Thomas, who died after being thrown from his SUV in a crash while
speeding in a snowstorm. Morgan said Thomas's neck was broken because
the SUV's roof collapsed a few inches -- not from rolling down the
highway because he wasn't wearing a seatbelt -- and sued General
Motors. Her lawyer begged jurors to award more than $100 million in
damages, perhaps more -- he "did not want to put an upper limit on
it." GM pointed out that Thomas's oversize SUV was exempt from federal
roof crush standards, yet it met them anyway. The jury sent a message:
of that $100 million, it awarded Morgan ...nothing.
#3: Tanisha Torres of Wyndanch, N.Y. The woman sued Radio Shack for
misspelling her town as "Crimedanch" on her cell phone bill. She
didn't even ask them to change it; she just sued. "I'm not a
criminal," she whined. "My son plays on the high school football
team." Yeah, that makes sense. The name "Crimedanch" is a common joke;
police in the area confirm it's a high-crime area. Still, Torres
claimed she suffered "outrage" and "embarrassment" at having to see
that spelling on her private phone bill. The suit seeks unspecified
damages.
#2: Homecomings Financial, a subsidiary of GMAC Financial Services, which
is a division of General Motors. The finance company accepted a change
of address notice from identity thieves for the account belonging to
Robert and Suzanne Korinke. The thieves ran up a $142,000 debt, and
the Kerinkes notified Homecomings of the fraud the moment they
discovered it. Homecomings sued them two years later, saying the
couple's "negligence" is what "caused the injury to Homecomings," not
the fact that the company accepted a change of address from fraudsters
-- and then gave them all the money they could drain. The victims got
the company to drop the suit, which demanded $74,000 plus attorney's
fees, after shelling out $5,000 in legal fees -- an outcome their
lawyer called "really lucky".
AND THE WINNER of the 2004 Stella Award: Mary Ubaudi of Madison County,
Ill. Ubaudi was a passenger in a car that got into a wreck. She put
most of the blame on the deepest pocket available: Mazda Motors, who
made the car she was riding in. Ubaudi demands "in excess of $150,000"
from the automaker, claiming it "failed to provide instructions
regarding the safe and proper use of a seatbelt." One hopes Mazda's
attorneys make her swear in court that she has never before worn a
seatbelt, has never flown on an airliner, and that she's too stupid to
figure out how to fasten a seatbelt.
-v-
TO CONFIRM THE VALIDITY OF THESE CASES, get more information on the True
Stella Awards, or sign up for a free e-mail subscription to new cases
as they are issued, see
http://www.StellaAwards.com/2004.html
WANT TO SEE THE FULL WRITE-UPS of all of these cases? A PDF file is
available for a small fee. See the 2004 page for info.
NOTE: If the write-up doesn't state an outcome for a case, it's probably
still pending. Unlike the fantasy world of the urban legend Stella
Awards, in real life the courts are so clogged, and "justice" so slow,
that it can take many years for a case to conclude. Sorry, but there
are no pat endings in the real world. If YOU hear of an update, please
DO send us a URL so we can update our readers. Thanks.
Copyright 2005
www.StellaAwards.com . This message may be forwarded as
long as it remains complete and unaltered.
----------==========**********O**********==========----------
Stop Goal Setting and Start Goal Getting Now
Now Is Your Chance to Get This 7-Part e-Course
Plus Great Motivation Articles and Tips
For a Limited Time Get a Bonus Book When Registering
Start Your Journey to Success:
http://www.PowerMeUp.com/tsa
----------==========**********O**********==========----------
CASE UPDATES
BIG GAME HUNTER Rolf Rohwer sued the manufacturer of the cartridge he
used in his rifle to shoot a charging lion during an African safari.
As reported in TSA #26, the lawyer for the "professional" hunter said
the bullet he chose to load was "not suitable for killing a charging
lion. It's suitable for killing a lion over a period of time. The lion
died basically while chewing on my client."
Rohwer's lawsuit against Federal Cartridge Co. of Minnesota charged
defective design and "failure to warn" over that defect. But U.S.
District Court Chief Judge James M. Rosenbaum threw the case out,
calling the hunter's arguments "sheer conjecture". He also ruled that
Rohwer failed to demonstrate that the bullet was dangerous [now
there's an interesting concept! -rc], or that the manufacturer had any
duty to warn him about its appropriateness for shooting lions. He also
dismissed claims for breech of warranty, negligence, and design
defect.
The incident took place in August 2000, and the lawsuit was filed in
April 2003. Total elapsed time from incident to conclusion of the
lawsuit: four years, three months.
SOURCE: "Big Game Hunter Fails to Bag Expert Testimony of Defect,
Causation", Product Safety & Liability Reporter, 20 December 2004
http://StellaAwards.com/cgi-bin/redirect4.pl?58a
-v-
AT LEAST TWO SUITS filed against McDonald's in 2003 claimed that the fast
food joint's offerings was responsible for the plaintiffs being obese
and unhealthy. (One of them, Caesar Barber, was a Runner-Up for 2003's
Stella Award.) Barber's case, as well as another filed on behalf of
two teenagers, were thrown out. At the time (TSA #17), I predicted we
haven't seen the last of such cases. I quoted one expert who compared
the whole concept to the suits against tobacco companies: they were
sued again and again and again, using various novel theories, until
finally they won. "So will there be more such McCases?" I asked. "You
can be sure of it," the write-up concluded.
Sure enough, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York has
reversed the dismissal of the suit filed on behalf of the two teens.
Judge Jed Rakoff reinstated the case, saying it should at least go to
the discovery stage. Attorney Samuel Hirsch promises to look into "the
ingredients, the advertisements, the type of representations that
[McDonald's] made" to lure those poor, poor kids into thinking
McDonald's food items "were healthy and wholesome, not as detrimental
to their health as medical and scientific studies have shown."
Meanwhile, a legislator in New Mexico has introduced a bill officially
titled the "Right to Eat Enchiladas Act", which is designed "to
prevent frivolous lawsuits against manufacturers, packers,
distributors, carriers, holders, sellers, marketers or advertisers of
food ... for any claim of injury arising out of weight gain, obesity,
a health condition associated with weight gain or obesity or other
generally known condition allegedly caused by or likely to result from
the long-term consumption of food." About 14 states have already
passed similar laws, many in direct response to the current assault
against McDonald's.
SOURCES:
1) "Fast-Food Suit Back on the Menu: Appeals Court Reinstates Class
Action Against McDonald's", ABA Journal, 28 January 04
http://StellaAwards.com/cgi-bin/redirect4.pl?58b
2) "Right to Eat Enchiladas Act", State of New Mexico Senate Bill 291,
2005 (PDF document)
http://www.thisistrue.com/cases/enchilada.html
COMMENTS AND LETTERS
First, my own comment on the 2004 finals: I find it interesting that
there are more examples of *corporate* abuse of the civil courts this
year. And it's not just corporations suing each other, it's also them
suing individuals. How many "tort reform" proposals have you seen that
addresses that? As I've often said, "tort reform" is a good idea, but
only if is systemic in nature; the "band-aid" approach most "reform"
groups tout won't solve the whole problem.
Another thing I've noticed: a lot of women are suing. Indeed, in last
issue's roundup of five cases (which will be posted on the web site's
"Sample" page until #59 is issued), ALL of the plaintiffs were women,
except for one which was identified as filed by the dead man's "family"
(generally code for "the widow, and maybe the kids will get something
when they turn 18").
Regarding last issue's cases, the one about the 94-year-old woman who
won the lottery -- $5.6 million which, according to the rules of that
particular lottery, is payable over 20 years -- brought the most comment.
"Now, you know I'm not going to live 20 years," she said, trying to
justify suing the lottery for the full amount payable immediately.
Several readers asked if she really wanted the full amount, all $5.6
million, or did she more reasonably just ask for the "present value" of
the prize? Well, I always provide my source for you to click through to
see, and indeed the Boston Globe reported: "she wants the Massachusetts
State Lottery Commission to cut her a check immediately for the full $5.6
million, minus taxes."
And obviously that would be a disaster for the lottery. The "present
value" of a 20-year $5.6 million annuity is certainly nowhere near $5.6
million. If forced to pay that NOW, the lottery would almost certainly be
bankrupted, if not by this payout then by the line-up of previous winners
who would want to cash in on such a ruling. Why is it reasonable to
change the rules for anyone? She knew (or "should have known," as lawyers
like to say) what the rules were when she bought the ticket. After all:
that particular rule was printed ON the ticket!
Plus, she had other alternatives. Steve, a government employee in
Virginia, was one of many who pointed out: "Any number of financial
institutions could legally arrange to give her a lump sum now in exchange
for the stream of payments. A good financial advisor could help her find
an honest and legitimate firm to do business with. She could also live
high-on-the-hog by obtaining credit from any number of lenders who would
be happy to extend it to her using the lottery winnings as collateral.
The fact that her lawyer did not give her this advice him/herself would
be surprising ...if I hadn't been reading your newsletter long enough to
know better."
Jim, an attorney in Pennsylvania, agrees, and is even more damning of
the woman's lawyer: "The State of Massachusetts would have a very good
likelihood of making the payments as agreed. If the woman assigns the
payments to the lender, payment is a virtual certainty. Most lenders
would jump at the chance to make a loan that good. As attorneys, our code
requires us to be 'zealous advocates of our client's best interests'.
That means we must explore other avenues. Here, the other avenues were
available."
LAST: In TSA #57 I told you about a letter I got from "Ellen in New
Jersey", who was ranting about the original Stella case. I mentioned that
she demanded that I create an "award" for the "stupidest statement made
in public"; I did just that, creating the "Ellen Awards" which are housed
on a subpage of the Stella Awards site:
http://www.EllenAwards.com
That led to scores of "nominations" of various spoutings of limited
intelligence and/or literacy, and people asking where they could
subscribe to the "Ellen Awards" list. Sorry, but I thought you'd get the
joke: Ellen won the award; we're done. I'm not doing another publication.
It'd get old anyway; who wants to spend the day -- day after day --
listening to stupid people try to argue a point ...badly? Not me. (If you
do, get a job in customer support!) While it's possible I'll add other
letters to that page, it's going to be on the order of one a year, not
one a week.
-v-
To continue the discussion, see the unofficial True Stella Awards
reader forum:
http://www.siece.net/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=1
--Randy Cassingham
TO SUBSCRIBE and receive the TRUE Stella Awards by e-mail for FREE, see
http://www.StellaAwards.com
TO UNSUBSCRIBE, see the last line of this message.
YOUR COMMENTS are welcome -- send them to
Comments@StellaAwards.com
Please include your first name, location and profession. Due to
volume, we cannot reply to most mail, and NEVER provide legal advice.
If you have legal questions, contact an attorney.
TO SUBMIT A CASE, please do NOT e-mail us. Instead, please use the form
on our site at
http://www.StellaAwards.com/submit.html
SOURCE REFERENCES are kept up-to-date on our server as possible; the URLs
given should work as long as the articles are available online. Some
sites may require registration to view articles.
STELLA AWARDS is a project of "This is True" --
http://www.thisistrue.com
-- and is published by ThisisTrue.Inc, PO Box 666, Ridgway CO 81432
USA.
Copyright 2005 by Randy Cassingham, All Rights Reserved. ALL
broadcast, publication, retransmission to the WWW, e-mail lists, or
paper, or copying or storage, in any medium, online or not, is PROHIBITED
without PRIOR written permission. However, permission is granted to
circulate this publication via MANUAL forwarding by e-mail to friends
PROVIDING THAT the text is forwarded IN ITS ENTIRETY, from the title line
on top through the end of this paragraph, and NO FEE is charged. We
REQUEST that you forward no more than three copies to any one person --
after that, they should get their own subscription. Stella Awards is a
trademark, and "This is True" is a registered trademark, of Freelance
Communications, an imprint of THISisTRUE.Inc.
stella awards
