Int. Courtroom – Day

A bailiff, looking suspiciously like the Cocoa Puffs bird, stands at attention.

BAILIFF

Here ye, here ye. The cartoon court calls the defendant Cap’n Crunch to the stand.

Cap’n Crunch nervously walks up to where he will testify. The bailiff holds out a Bible to him.

BAILIFF

Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

CAP’N CRUNCH

(gulps)

I do!

The captain takes his seat and a lawyer, looking an awful lot like Count Chocula,  approaches.

COUNT CHOCULA LAWYER

So, Mr. Crunch…

A defense lawyer, who looks like Quisp, leaps to his feat. His propella-beanie whirls.

DEFENSE LAWYER

Objection! That’s Cap’n Crunch!

The judge, who looks like King Vitamin, lightly taps his gavel.

JUDGE

Sustained. Try not to insult the witness, counsel.

Count Chocula lawyer grins mischievously.

COUNT CHOCULA

Oh, I have nothing but the utmost respect for the witness. Now, Cap’n Crunch, tell us, your cereal is called “Crunchberries” is it not?

CAP’N CRUNCH

It is.

COUNT CHOCULA

But those aren’t real berries, are they?

I could go on and on. This is too much fun. But I’ll stop there. I figured I’d go from the ridiculous to the sublime. But with this story it tends to circle back to the ridiculous anyway.

Today, I got a news release from a Corona Del Mar chapter of Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse. The headline was a real grabber: Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse Stand With Cap’n Crunch.

It wasn’t the freshest news. The group was ridiculing a lawsuit dumped in May to underscore its point that something needs to be done about jerks who file ridiculous court claims. Remember the woman who sued McDonald’s because she spilled hot coffee on her leg? That one sounds like the Scopes Trial compared to this. Janine Sugawara of San Diego sued PepsiCo Inc. because the good captain’s “crunchberries” cereal didn’t have real fruit in it.

I’ll have to quote the lawsuit itself to do it justice:

The Crunchberries are pieces of cereal in bright fruit colors, shaped to resemble berries. While close inspection reveals that the Crunchberries on the PDP are not really berries, Plaintiff contends that the colorful Crunchberries, combined with use of the word “berry ” in the Product name, convey the message that Cap’n Crunch is not all sugar and starch, but contains redeeming fruit. This message is allegedly supplemented and reinforced by additional marketing that represents that “Crunchberries is a combination of Crunch biscuits and colorful red, purple, teal and green berries.”

In actuality, the Product contains no berries of any kind. If the consumer takes the box from the shelf and examines the fine print of the ingredient list, he or she will discover that the only fruit content is a touch of strawberry fruit concentrate, twelfth in order on the ingredient list.”

I know what you’re thinking. I made this all up. I’m about to yell, “April Fools,” a couple of months too late. Sadly, no. If I met someone at a party babbling this nonsense as a serious argument I might be inclined to slap them awake. But chances are unless you’re adjusting your tinfoil hat right now then I’m preaching to the choir. Anyway, I tried getting in touch with the lawyer who filed this lawsuit, but he didn’t call me back. I’m as curious as you are to hear how he defends it.

Maryann Maloney Marino, the regional director of Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse, told me she sent out the release to make the point about how necessary tort reform is. I told her I always get a little leery of the cries for tort reform as they tend to offer the usual populist solutions that don’t always work out for the best. But she wasn’t offering up the usual bromides — the draconian crackdowns on ambulance chasers. Rather, her organization just craves legislative solutions that will discourage such abuses of the system.

It’s true that anyone hassled by a frivolous lawsuit like this could seek sanctions against the plaintiff, but some of the more notorious and well-financed law firms might just consider that the cost of doing business since they’re really only interested in harassing deep-pocket defendants into shelling out settlement cash. Something does need to be done to discourage that kind of chicanery. Steeper fines or even the threat of disbarment might accomplish that. But good luck getting that through Sacramento. Assemblyman Van Tran has attempted tort reform legislation this year and it was put into what I call committee coma — in other words, it was put on a shelf never to be heard from again.

“A few years ago there was the case of the guacamole not being green enough,” Marino said, referring to a case in Santa Monica. “While cases like that are funny, in this economy they can cost jobs.  All the settlement money they pay out could cost someone’s job… that’s why we try to bring it to the forefront.”

Well said. Times are tough. Frivolous lawsuits can cost people their jobs — hopefully someday they’ll cost only lawyers their jobs. Until then, all I can say is, “Silly rabbit, Trix are for kids.”

Sorry, I couldn’t resist.

Bookmark to: