A court of law is a good place to get justice, defend your honor, or get compensation for wrongdoings. But, in the U.S., suing other people has become quite a common occurrence. Every year, people file over 100 million lawsuits in state trial courts and around 400k cases federally.
Some people say that there's a 'lawsuit culture' in America, and some of the cases from this list might just prove that. We've scoured the Internet and found the most absurd and hilarious reasons people sued someone, courtesy of this, this, this, and this Quora thread.
So, scroll down and see for yourself how suing Redd Bull for not growing wings panned out for the person who filed the suit.
#21
Bodine v. Enterprise High School
Ricky Bodine, a 19-year-old high-school graduate who, with three other friends (one of whom had a criminal record), decided the night of March 1, 1982, to steal a floodlight from the roof of the Enterprise High School gymnasium. Ricky climbed the roof, removed the floodlight, lowered it to the ground to his friends, and, as he was walking across the roof (perhaps to steal a second floodlight), he fell through the skylight.
Bodine suffered terrible injuries.
Question: Is the school legally responsible for burglars’ safety?
Bodine sued for $8 million and settled for $260,000 plus $1200/month for life.
Ricky Bodine, a 19-year-old high-school graduate who, with three other friends (one of whom had a criminal record), decided the night of March 1, 1982, to steal a floodlight from the roof of the Enterprise High School gymnasium. Ricky climbed the roof, removed the floodlight, lowered it to the ground to his friends, and, as he was walking across the roof (perhaps to steal a second floodlight), he fell through the skylight.
Bodine suffered terrible injuries.
Question: Is the school legally responsible for burglars’ safety?
Bodine sued for $8 million and settled for $260,000 plus $1200/month for life.
13points
#22
There was a man named Doug Costello who sold a used $40 USD printer on Craig’s list. He sold it to a man who frequently filed lawsuits and was known within the county for filing lawsuits about ridiculous things. The man who purchased it was named Gersh Zavodnik.
According to him, the printer was broken—not functional. Gersh sued Doug for ‘falsely advertising a malfunctioning printer with missing parts, and taking Gersh’s money.’
Zavodnik threw away the printer, although he sued Costello for a whopping 6k USD.
Now poor Zavodnik, he is emotionally distressed, as all people would be when they get a printer that doesn’t work… so he files another lawsuit. Taking it to the county superior court, he files a lawsuit for ‘breach of contract, fraud, conversion, deceptive advertising and emotional distress.’
…this guy is creative.
He tried 27 more times to get him to pay $30k USD for the sale of the $40 printer. He’s denied each time.
So Zavodnik, creative as he is, files a $300k lawsuit against Costello for conspiring with a judge. He also files a $600k lawsuit against Costello for liabilities for the sale of a $40 printer.
By this time, you are surely thinking: WTF?
And Costello ended up having to pay that $900k accumulated from multiple charges.
Six years after the sale of the $40 printer sale, Costello pays $30k for breach of contract.
Remember, this is a $40 printer on Craig’s list.
According to him, the printer was broken—not functional. Gersh sued Doug for ‘falsely advertising a malfunctioning printer with missing parts, and taking Gersh’s money.’
Zavodnik threw away the printer, although he sued Costello for a whopping 6k USD.
Now poor Zavodnik, he is emotionally distressed, as all people would be when they get a printer that doesn’t work… so he files another lawsuit. Taking it to the county superior court, he files a lawsuit for ‘breach of contract, fraud, conversion, deceptive advertising and emotional distress.’
…this guy is creative.
He tried 27 more times to get him to pay $30k USD for the sale of the $40 printer. He’s denied each time.
So Zavodnik, creative as he is, files a $300k lawsuit against Costello for conspiring with a judge. He also files a $600k lawsuit against Costello for liabilities for the sale of a $40 printer.
By this time, you are surely thinking: WTF?
And Costello ended up having to pay that $900k accumulated from multiple charges.
Six years after the sale of the $40 printer sale, Costello pays $30k for breach of contract.
Remember, this is a $40 printer on Craig’s list.
11points
#23
1-Richard Overton woke up one day, and after going through life, he switched on the TV.
Surprisingly, he encountered an ad for Anheuser Busch’s Beer.
It featured women in bikinis on tropical islands who were chatting with men over a drink of Beer. Impressed by the ad, he must have realised the benefits of beer and probably went to the nearest store to try the heavenly nectar.
Spoiler alert, nothing happened. No women were near him. No water to swim in. The gall! How could Anheuser Busch promote the idea that fantasies could become true! Oh no! They were still at large, duping all of America and stealing their innocence.
Worst of all, he realised that alcohol was dangerous. Scary and so unexpected!
Valiantly, he decided to fight for the rights of beer drinkers worldwide. On June 6 1991, our hero sued Anheuser Busch for $10000 because the Tv commercials “involving tropical settings, and beautiful women had caused him physical and mental injury, emotional distress and financial loss.
The poor man! He must be scarred!
Remember kids, BEER IS BAD. Especially Anheuser Busch.
Unfortunately, he didn’t win. However, we will never forget him. Blessed be that man.
Surprisingly, he encountered an ad for Anheuser Busch’s Beer.
It featured women in bikinis on tropical islands who were chatting with men over a drink of Beer. Impressed by the ad, he must have realised the benefits of beer and probably went to the nearest store to try the heavenly nectar.
Spoiler alert, nothing happened. No women were near him. No water to swim in. The gall! How could Anheuser Busch promote the idea that fantasies could become true! Oh no! They were still at large, duping all of America and stealing their innocence.
Worst of all, he realised that alcohol was dangerous. Scary and so unexpected!
Valiantly, he decided to fight for the rights of beer drinkers worldwide. On June 6 1991, our hero sued Anheuser Busch for $10000 because the Tv commercials “involving tropical settings, and beautiful women had caused him physical and mental injury, emotional distress and financial loss.
The poor man! He must be scarred!
Remember kids, BEER IS BAD. Especially Anheuser Busch.
Unfortunately, he didn’t win. However, we will never forget him. Blessed be that man.
11points
#24
There was a rich businessman here in Toronto, a widower with three kids, all of whom he had already made arrangements to provide for so most of his estate was going to go to charity. He was getting on in years and found companionship with an older lady.
Naturally, as people do when they get older, he became increasingly unable to handle his own affairs. However, he had thought ahead and had already created a committee of three other men, all titans of industry, to manage his affairs if that happened.
So when it did, our rich man’s lady friend found that they were essentially putting her on a generous allowance rather than allowing her to buy whatever she wanted.
So she came to us to go to court and install her as the rich man’s substitute decision maker. Now, please note that this would not have been a problem had they been married, and they were on the verge of doing so, but one of the rich man’s friends reminded him before the ceremony that if he did get married, his carefully laid out estate plan would be thrown into absolute chaos which would most likely attract massive tax consequences, so he backed out.
Here’s the thing - we took on the case thinking we would get a big payout. There was a massive amount of money involved.
But problems presented themselves immediately. First, if a person chooses a substitute decision maker, the court is unlikely to replace them unless they’re doing something self-serving. Like I said, these three guys were all of the highest reputation and they had all known the rich guy for decades. They were doing a first rate job and were working well together.
However, our client had a series of old fraud convictions. Also, she stood to massively benefit if she was appointed.
It took virtually no time for the court to reject our application entirely. Her previous fraud convictions were the nail in the proverbial coffin.
The rich guy eventually passed and she worked out a settlement with the estate for ongoing support, which she was entitled to. The amount she received was about three times what I made in a year.
And we never did get paid.
Naturally, as people do when they get older, he became increasingly unable to handle his own affairs. However, he had thought ahead and had already created a committee of three other men, all titans of industry, to manage his affairs if that happened.
So when it did, our rich man’s lady friend found that they were essentially putting her on a generous allowance rather than allowing her to buy whatever she wanted.
So she came to us to go to court and install her as the rich man’s substitute decision maker. Now, please note that this would not have been a problem had they been married, and they were on the verge of doing so, but one of the rich man’s friends reminded him before the ceremony that if he did get married, his carefully laid out estate plan would be thrown into absolute chaos which would most likely attract massive tax consequences, so he backed out.
Here’s the thing - we took on the case thinking we would get a big payout. There was a massive amount of money involved.
But problems presented themselves immediately. First, if a person chooses a substitute decision maker, the court is unlikely to replace them unless they’re doing something self-serving. Like I said, these three guys were all of the highest reputation and they had all known the rich guy for decades. They were doing a first rate job and were working well together.
However, our client had a series of old fraud convictions. Also, she stood to massively benefit if she was appointed.
It took virtually no time for the court to reject our application entirely. Her previous fraud convictions were the nail in the proverbial coffin.
The rich guy eventually passed and she worked out a settlement with the estate for ongoing support, which she was entitled to. The amount she received was about three times what I made in a year.
And we never did get paid.
11points
#25
Can I join in? After all, I’m “only” a legal secretary (retired at that), not a lawyer.
Decades ago a new Chief Justice took his seat on the Supreme Court of Kentucky. In a magazine article he reminisced about his career that had led him to this position, including the years when he was a judge granting divorces.
One day a couple and their lawyers appeared before him. The couple were divorcing and they had agreed on all the things that had to be settled — alimony, child custody, child support, property distribution — with one exception. Which was, they hadn’t been able to decide who was going to keep their waffle iron.
The judge assumed that the waffle iron held some sentimental value for both spouses. But it wasn’t explained to him, and anyway, he was angry that the court’s time was being taken up with such a trivial matter. He told the parties that he was going to call a 15-minute recess. If after that time they still hadn’t agreed on who’d keep the waffle iron, he would order a sale of all the marital property on the courthouse steps, waffle iron included. With the proceeds split 50–50, they could both buy as many waffle irons as they wanted.
True to his word, he called the recess. When everyone reconvened 15 minutes later, he was informed that the spouses had decided who would take the waffle iron. Having read the article this far, I was deeply disappointed that it didn’t say who ended up with the appliance, and could only think of three possible explanations. One, the reporter had forgotten to ask (unlikely). Two, the judge had forgotten (almost as unlikely). Or three, he didn’t ask because he didn’t care. He was only concerned about two signatures on the settlement agreement so he could sign the order granting the divorce.
Drat.
Decades ago a new Chief Justice took his seat on the Supreme Court of Kentucky. In a magazine article he reminisced about his career that had led him to this position, including the years when he was a judge granting divorces.
One day a couple and their lawyers appeared before him. The couple were divorcing and they had agreed on all the things that had to be settled — alimony, child custody, child support, property distribution — with one exception. Which was, they hadn’t been able to decide who was going to keep their waffle iron.
The judge assumed that the waffle iron held some sentimental value for both spouses. But it wasn’t explained to him, and anyway, he was angry that the court’s time was being taken up with such a trivial matter. He told the parties that he was going to call a 15-minute recess. If after that time they still hadn’t agreed on who’d keep the waffle iron, he would order a sale of all the marital property on the courthouse steps, waffle iron included. With the proceeds split 50–50, they could both buy as many waffle irons as they wanted.
True to his word, he called the recess. When everyone reconvened 15 minutes later, he was informed that the spouses had decided who would take the waffle iron. Having read the article this far, I was deeply disappointed that it didn’t say who ended up with the appliance, and could only think of three possible explanations. One, the reporter had forgotten to ask (unlikely). Two, the judge had forgotten (almost as unlikely). Or three, he didn’t ask because he didn’t care. He was only concerned about two signatures on the settlement agreement so he could sign the order granting the divorce.
Drat.
10points
#26
I’ve seen many people file lawsuits for trivial reasons. A few that come to mind off the top of my head include:
The woman who sued the phone company in federal court for making a minor billing error, despite the fact that the phone company immediately corrected the error when she pointed it out to them.
The couple who sued the company that built their housing development because they thought a house four blocks away from theirs had an ugly chimney.
The man who filed a lawsuit in federal court against some children who had done a minor prank that took less than a minute to clean up.
The woman who sued the phone company in federal court for making a minor billing error, despite the fact that the phone company immediately corrected the error when she pointed it out to them.
The couple who sued the company that built their housing development because they thought a house four blocks away from theirs had an ugly chimney.
The man who filed a lawsuit in federal court against some children who had done a minor prank that took less than a minute to clean up.
10points
#27
Someone was attacked by a bum who was wielding a meat cleaver. He then waited almost 2 years without any medical treatment, probably because his injuries healed and didn’t result in anything permanent. He called about 1 month before the statute of limitations would expire and he wanted to sue the government instead of the bum. His reasoning was that the police allowed it to happen because they were in on the secret communist party following him from his homeland and that the bum was also a communist agent. He also had absolutely no proof. The scar was barely visible. There was no footage, no documents from police or anyone. To me there were also no damages at that point. The guy was nuts. I explained that the statute of limitations for government would be 6 months according to the facts I see, so he should check around for someone else’s opinion.
Oh, and a funny guy who had $10,050 in property damage so he insisted on a civil limited lawsuit. This was for property only. I explained that small claims would be much cheaper and faster and that civil limited wouldn’t be worth the time, added costs, and attorney fees for litigation despite the cap of small claims being $10,000 causing him to lose $50. He still insisted on civil limited. Like…why? He would rather the case languish for a year in litigation with contested liability and lose $5,000 instead.
Oh, and a funny guy who had $10,050 in property damage so he insisted on a civil limited lawsuit. This was for property only. I explained that small claims would be much cheaper and faster and that civil limited wouldn’t be worth the time, added costs, and attorney fees for litigation despite the cap of small claims being $10,000 causing him to lose $50. He still insisted on civil limited. Like…why? He would rather the case languish for a year in litigation with contested liability and lose $5,000 instead.
9points
#28
The client is a lumber yard out in a rural part of the country. Another company had sent over a driver to pick up a load of lumber using a flatbed semi truck. After all the lumber was loaded and strapped down, the driver left.
The driver left the lumber yard driveway, and then crossed a Railroad Track. (This was maybe 600 feet away from the lumber company office.) After crossing the bumpy Railroad Tracks, the driver stops again to re-tighten his load.
Then the lumber yard got a phone call from that driver’s employer, asking for him. They said, “Just a minute; we’ll see if we can grab him.” Then the lumber yard manager stepped outside, and honked the horn on his pickup truck to attract the truck driver’s attention, and then waved him back motioning that he had a phone call. The driver waved back to acknowledge.
So when the driver was done tightening his load, he got back into his truck, and proceeded to back up over the Railroad Tracks. Suddenly, a fast moving TRAIN smashed into the flatbed truck, k**ling the driver. It was a tragic accident.
And they sued the lumber yard suggesting the accident was their fault.
I’m not an attorney. I was the claims adjuster on the claim. I had our defense attorney file an Answer, and we also counter sued, based on a new statute pertaining to frivolous lawsuits.
What really ticks me off is that the management of the insurance company had some big push to dispose of cases because they felt our claim inventory was getting too large. They assigned a special team of adjusters to just throw fast money at each claim in an effort to CLOSE FILES. And they paid $5,000 to settle the claim.
The driver left the lumber yard driveway, and then crossed a Railroad Track. (This was maybe 600 feet away from the lumber company office.) After crossing the bumpy Railroad Tracks, the driver stops again to re-tighten his load.
Then the lumber yard got a phone call from that driver’s employer, asking for him. They said, “Just a minute; we’ll see if we can grab him.” Then the lumber yard manager stepped outside, and honked the horn on his pickup truck to attract the truck driver’s attention, and then waved him back motioning that he had a phone call. The driver waved back to acknowledge.
So when the driver was done tightening his load, he got back into his truck, and proceeded to back up over the Railroad Tracks. Suddenly, a fast moving TRAIN smashed into the flatbed truck, k**ling the driver. It was a tragic accident.
And they sued the lumber yard suggesting the accident was their fault.
I’m not an attorney. I was the claims adjuster on the claim. I had our defense attorney file an Answer, and we also counter sued, based on a new statute pertaining to frivolous lawsuits.
What really ticks me off is that the management of the insurance company had some big push to dispose of cases because they felt our claim inventory was getting too large. They assigned a special team of adjusters to just throw fast money at each claim in an effort to CLOSE FILES. And they paid $5,000 to settle the claim.
9points
#29
My policyholder operated food service in many jails and prisons around the country.
We got lots of lawsuits filed pro se by prisoners, usually complaining that they didn’t get salt packets with their meals, that the vegetarian meals just omitted the meat the other inmates got, that the halal meals were the same as the kosher meals, that they didn’t like the sandwich meat, and other trivialities.
The pro se suits were usually dismissed by the court. These nuisance claims still cost plenty in defense costs.
We got lots of lawsuits filed pro se by prisoners, usually complaining that they didn’t get salt packets with their meals, that the vegetarian meals just omitted the meat the other inmates got, that the halal meals were the same as the kosher meals, that they didn’t like the sandwich meat, and other trivialities.
The pro se suits were usually dismissed by the court. These nuisance claims still cost plenty in defense costs.
9points
#30
A brazilian lady had a lawsuit against Banco do Brasil (one of the largest retail banks in Brazil) because some old account her grandfather had opened in her name when she was a child, but the bank closed it without permission… so the lawsuit was based on all the interests for 50 years… but in those 50 years, Brazil had several periods of hyperinflation and currency changed some 5 times, each time it changed they would cut several zeros from the currency (like… $50000 Cruzeiros became $5 Reais)
Somehow, she and her lawyer came to a figure of 2 duodecillion Reais.
The news articles made fun it was larger than Brazilian GDP.
And that was actually such an UNDERESTIMATION of the giant value that it shows how people can´t really visualize such numbers.
Larger than the brazilian GDP?
It was probably larger than the value of the entire Galaxy. (value, not GDP).
Earth’s GDP is 100 trillion dollars.
So if we divide 2.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000 by 100.000.000.000.000…
You get 20.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000… 20 septillion…
Meaning… that value is equal to 20 septillion Earth GDPs.
If the Milky Way had 100 billion Earths… that would mean the value would be equal to the GDP of 200 trillion galaxies, each one with 100 billion Earths.
lol
Somehow, she and her lawyer came to a figure of 2 duodecillion Reais.
The news articles made fun it was larger than Brazilian GDP.
And that was actually such an UNDERESTIMATION of the giant value that it shows how people can´t really visualize such numbers.
Larger than the brazilian GDP?
It was probably larger than the value of the entire Galaxy. (value, not GDP).
Earth’s GDP is 100 trillion dollars.
So if we divide 2.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000 by 100.000.000.000.000…
You get 20.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000… 20 septillion…
Meaning… that value is equal to 20 septillion Earth GDPs.
If the Milky Way had 100 billion Earths… that would mean the value would be equal to the GDP of 200 trillion galaxies, each one with 100 billion Earths.
lol
8points
#31
Red Bull doesn’t actually give you wings
In 2014, Red Bull was sued by Benjamin Careathers who argued that despite drinking Red Bull for 10 years, he hadn’t developed a pair of wings (welcome to America everyone). He argued that their motto ‘Red Bull gives you wings’ obviously implies that drinking their energy drink would lead to feathers growing from your back.
Red Bull agreed to pay $13 million to settle the dispute and they even created a website so that everyone who bought a Red Bull from 2002 to 2015 would be eligible for a $10 compensation.
In 2014, Red Bull was sued by Benjamin Careathers who argued that despite drinking Red Bull for 10 years, he hadn’t developed a pair of wings (welcome to America everyone). He argued that their motto ‘Red Bull gives you wings’ obviously implies that drinking their energy drink would lead to feathers growing from your back.
Red Bull agreed to pay $13 million to settle the dispute and they even created a website so that everyone who bought a Red Bull from 2002 to 2015 would be eligible for a $10 compensation.
6points
