Wile E Coyote vs Acme

[Cheshire Figment]

In The United States District Court for the District of Arizona

Case No. B19293

Wile E. Coyote, Plaintiff

vs.

Acme Company, Defendant )
and ) Jointly and Severally
Marvin Acme, Defendant )


NOW COMES, I.M.A. Shyster, Esquire, attorney for Mr. Coyote, to wit,

My client, Mr. Wile E. Coyote (hereinafter, "Plaintiff"), a resident of Arizona and contiguous states, does hereby bring suit for damages against the Acme Company, manufacturer and retail distributor of various and assorted merchandise, a Delaware Corporation, and doing business in every state, district, and territory within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, and Marvin Acme, Chief Executive Officer and sole stockholder thereof.

Plaintiff 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 USC 47, section 2072, subsection (a), relating to product liability.

Plaintiff states that on eighty-five separate occasions he has purchased of the Acme Company (hereinafter, "Defendant"), through Defendant's mail-order department, certain products which did cause him grievous bodily injury due to defects in manufacture or improper cautionary labelling. Sales slips made out to Plaintiff as proof of purchase are at present in the possession of the Honorable Court, marked Exhibit A.

Such injuries sustained by Plaintiff have temporarily restricted his ability to make a living in his profession of predator. Plaintiff is self employed and thus not eligible for Workmen's Compensation.

Plaintiff states that on December 13th he received of Defendant via parcel post of the United States Postal Service, one each Acme Rocket Sled. The intention of Plaintiff was to use the Rocket sled to aid him in pursuit of his prey. Whereupon Plaintiff removed it from its wooden shipping crate and sighting his prey in the distance, activated the ignition. As Plaintiff gripped the handlebars, the Rocket Sled accelerated with such sudden and precipitate force as to stretch Plaintiff's fore limbs to a length of fifty feet. Subsequently, the rest of Plaintiff's body shot forward with a violent jolt, causing severe strain to his back and neck and placing Plaintiff most 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 Plaintiff abreast of his prey. At that moment the animal under pursuit, a nonendangered species pursuant to all applicable Department of the Interior regulations, then in effect, and veered sharply to the right. Plaintiff vigorously attempted to follow this maneuver but was unable to, due to poorly designed steering on the Rocket Sled and a faulty or nonexistent braking system. Shortly thereafter, the unchecked progress of the Rocket Sled brought it and Plaintiff into collision with the side of a geologic formation known as a Mesa.

Paragraph One of the Report of Attending Physician (Exhibit B), prepared by Dr. B. A. Phoule, M.D., a licensed medical practitioner and board certified in the practice of cartographic medicine, details the multiple fractures, contusions, and tissue damage suffered by Plaintiff as a result of this collision. Repair of the injuries required a full bandage around the head (excluding the ears), a neck brace, full or partial casts on all four legs, and second degree singeing of 100% bodily fur.

Hampered by these injuries, Plaintiff was nevertheless obliged to support himself and family. With this in mind, he purchased of Defendant, as an aid to mobility one pair of Acme Rocket Skates. When attempting to use said 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 employing powerful jet engines (in this case, two) to inadequate vehicles, with little or no provision whatsoever for passenger safety. Encumbered by his heavy casts, Plaintiff 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.

Plaintiff states that on occasions too numerous to list in this document he has suffered mishaps with explosives purchased of Defendant: the Acme "Little Giant" fire cracker, the Acme Self-Guided Aerial Bomb, etcetera. (For a full listing, see the Acme Mail Order Explosives Catalogue 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 Plaintiff performed in an expected manner. To cite just one example: At the expense of much time and personal effort, Plaintiff constructed around the outer rim of a Mesa a wooden trough beginning at the top of the butte and spiraling 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". Plaintiff placed a generous pile of birdseed, compliant to all applicable USDA regulations, directly on the "X", and then, carrying the spherical Acme Bomb (Catalogue #78-832), climbed to the top of the butte. Plaintiff's prey, a Roadrunneris Americanis, seeing the birdseed, approached, and Plaintiff 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 Plaintiff's careful preparations to naught, the premature detonation of Defendant's product resulted in the following disfigurements to Plaintiff:

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 after shock 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, purchased by Plaintiff on June 23rd which are Plaintiff's Exhibit D. The selected fragments were provided 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 steel springs of high tensile strength and compressed in a tightly coiled position by a cocking device with a lanyard release. Plaintiff believing said 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, Plaintiff affixed them by their bottoms to the side of a large boulder. Adjacent to the boulder was a path which Plaintiff's prey was known to frequent. Plaintiff put his hind feet in the wood-and-metal sandals and crouched in readiness, his right fore paw holding firmly to the lanyard release. Within a short time Plaintiff's prey did indeed appear on the path coming toward him. Unsuspecting, the prey stopped near Plaintiff, well within range of the springs at full extension. Plaintiff gauged the distance with care and proceeded to pull the lanyard release.

At this point, Defendant's product should have thrust Plaintiff forward and away from the boulder. Instead, for reasons yet unknown, the Acme Spring-Powered Shoes thrust the boulder away from Plaintiff. As the intended prey looked on unharmed, Plaintiff hung suspended in air. Then the twin springs recoiled, bringing Plaintiff 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 Plaintiff was thrust skyward. A second recoil and collision followed. The boulder, meanwhile, which was roughly ovoid in shape, estimated to weigh 185 tons, had begun to bounce down a hillside, the coiling and recoiling of the springs adding to its velocity. At each bounce, Plaintiff came into contact with the boulder, or the boulder came into contact with Plaintiff, 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 Plaintiff, to wit, flattening of the cranium, sideways displacement of the tongue and 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 Plaintiff's body tissues, a rare and painful condition which caused Plaintiff to expand upward and contract downward alternately as he walked, and to emit an off-key, accordion like wheezing with every step. The distracting and embarrassing nature of this symptom has been a major impediment to Plaintiff's pursuit of a normal social life.

As the Honorable Court is no doubt aware, Defendant has a virtual monopoly of manufacture and sale of goods required in conjunction with Plaintiff's work and livelihood. It is Plaintiff's 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. Though much as he has come to mistrust Defendant's products, Plaintiff 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.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court regard these larger economic implications and assess punitive damages in the amount of seventeen million dollars. In addition, Plaintiff seeks actual damages (missed meals, medical expenses, days lost from professional occupation) of one million dollars; general damages (mental suffering and permanent injury to reputation) of twenty million dollars; and attorney's fees of seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars. By awarding Plaintiff 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. And for such other and further awards, reliefs and things as may be just.

WITNESSETH:

[Cheshire Figment]

In The United States District Court for the District of Arizona

Case No. B19293

Wile E. Coyote, Plaintiff

vs.

Acme Company, Defendant )
and ) Jointly and Severally
Marvin Acme, Defendant )


OPENING STATEMENT OF ARTHUR B. FUDDLE, ESQUIRE,
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT

By Mr. Fuddle:

Ladies and Gentleman of the jury: the opening statement you have just heard from Mr. Shyster on behalf of the plaintiff, Wile E. Coyote, paints an incomplete picture of what occurred on the occasions when Mr.Coyote claims he was injured by ACME products.

The evidence will clearly show that my clients, Acme Products Corp., a Division of Dangerously Innovative Products and Patents Incorporated (or "DIPPI") and Marvin Acme, are not at fault in this matter, and that any injuries sustained by the plaintiff were clearly caused by his own negligence, assumption of the risk and/or misuse of the products.

Now, we have all seen the footage on television of the plaintiff withstanding various injuries which appear to be caused by Acme's products. You have seen over and over the tape of a hapless coyote being bludgeoned by a boulder as he is helplessly trapped by his Acme Spring-Loaded Shoes. We have all seen the photographs taken at Warner Memorial Hospital of Mr. Coyote in a very small incubator, on life support, as his doctors attempt to straighten out the accordion-like folds from his body. We have all seen the gruesome images of the operation in which Dr. Tazmanian D. Devil whirls like a dervish, obscuring his features and creating a starry, "dust cloud" effect, while numerous limbs holding various surgical instruments swiftly repair the nerve damage to Mr. Coyote's extremities.

It is normal for any human being to feel pity, horror, and even anger at such images. I want you to put those images aside for the moment, because they paint an incomplete picture. What the media has not disclosed to you, and what you will see in this courtroom, are various attempts at murder committed by the plaintiff - attempts which, fortunately, failed - while using my client's products. As the plaintiff readily admits, he is a predator, and his sole function in life is to track down and kill an innocent, highway traversing ornithoid.

You see, ladies and gentleman, while the plaintiff is a natural predator, he is not a very good one. His own skills were inadequate to complete the task at hand, so he chose to seek the aid of various devices to effectuate his diabolical schemes. He looked in a catalogue, saw my client's products, and ordered them in the hope that they would assist him in killing his prey.

But ladies and gentleman, Acme's products are not meant to cause intentional harm to anyone. The plaintiff has taken what were designed as amusements, toys for the young and the feebleminded, and has twisted their use to his own purposes.

But I digress. Let us examine the plaintiff's claims and how the evidence clearly refutes the proposition that Acme is responsible for any harm sustained by the plaintiff.

Mr. Coyote states that on December 13th he received an Acme Rocket Sled, that he attempted to use said rocket sled to pursue his prey, and that, upon igniting the sled, it accelerated with "sudden and precipitate force as to stretch Mr. Coyote's forelimbs to a length of fifty feet."

There are several reasons why Acme cannot be held responsible for any injuries caused by this incident. First, the warning label attached conspicuously to the inside of the left front tire of the sled clearly stated, and I quote: "WARNING: IGNITION OF THIS DEVICE AT FULL THROTTLE MAY CAUSE SUDDEN AND PRECIPITATE FORCE AS TO STRETCH USER'S FORELIMBS TO A LENGTH OF UP TO SIXTY FEET, OR MAY CAUSE DEATH." That the plaintiff suffered so little as a result of his carelessness can be attributed only to Providence.

Second, Arizona law is clear on this point: a plaintiff who is found to be violating any law whose purpose is safety at the time of his injury is contributorily negligent, per se. There is ample evidence that Mr. Coyote was violating both the laws of gravity and inertia at the time of this incident, and thus he is responsible for his own woes.

I could list many more examples of Mr. Coyote's negligent conduct in connection with his use of Acme's products, but you will hear all about them as the trial goes on. You will also hear the following evidence:

(1) You will hear the plaintiff himself testify that, prior to the injuries complained of in this accident, he has suffered numerous injuries. As an example, on one occasion prior to the use of any Acme product, the plaintiff cornered his prey on the edge of a rather thin precipice. Taking an ordinary saw, the plaintiff began cutting away so that the edge of the cliff, with his prey on it, would drop some 1500 feet to a jagged, rocky destruction. Instead, by some inexplicable twist of fate the edge of the cliff remained standing while the whole mountain, on which the plaintiff was standing, plummeted to the bottom of the ravine, causing numerous injuries which affect the plaintiff to this day.

On another occasion, Mr. Coyote was chasing his prey and followed it off of the edge of a cliff onto thin air, not realizing until too late that his prey, a bird, could remain in the air almost indefinitely while he, a canine, could not. As a result, he fell yet again, suffering even further severe and debilitating injuries which predate the injuries complained of in this action.

(2) You will also hear the testimony of Mr. Road Runner, the plaintiff's prey and the true victim in this tragedy. Mr. Runner has been forced to live a nomadic lifestyle as a result of Mr. Coyote's unwanted attention, preventing him from forming any type of long term relationships. Numerous restraining orders had no effect. Mr. Runner has also suffered numerous psychological problems as a result of Mr. Coyote's actions, including but not limited to an inability to trust anyone who provides him with birdseed, a necessary ingredient in his daily nutritional schedule.

(3) You will also hear from a witness to many of the incidents alleged in plaintiff's complaint, a colorful local prospector with red hair and moustache who has been known to proclaim: "No rootin' tootin' coyote can outsmart Yosemite Sam on any day of the week!" Don't be fooled by his gruff manner and twin pearl-handled six-shooters, he's a pussycat.

(4) Customer service records of defendant Acme, which we were forced to produce in this matter, clearly show that none of the complaints registered by Acme's customers nationwide have ever resulted in criminal convictions of the officers of the corporation.

(5) Finally, videotape evidence will demonstrate that plaintiff faked many of his injuries, setting out to create performances especially for a jury such as yourself. On numerous occasions he would "mug" for the camera, as if he was well aware beforehand that he was being taped. For instance, during the "Rocket Sled" incident, as his forelimbs were stretched out ahead of him and his body remained behind, he looked straight into the camera with a forlorn, tired expression, as if to say: "Look at how terrible my situation is, can you guess what's going to happen to me now." This jury is too smart to fall for such petty theatrics.

In summary, ladies and gentlemen, it will be clear to you from the evidence that Acme's products, if used properly, will cause only minimal injuries to a user and his loved ones. The plaintiff in this case has brought his troubles upon himself by adopting his carnivorous lifestyle. As others have so adequately uttered: "Live by the Super Slick Jet Propulsion Automated Explosive Metal-Shearing Heat-Seeking Laser-Guided Razor-Edged Boomerang, die by the Super Slick, etc."

I ask you, on behalf of my clients, to dismiss the plaintiff's claims against them.



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(NOTE: At this printing there is no attribution as to the original source of the lawsuit. However, there is attribution to Stephen Menard, a litigation attorney at a defense firm in Philadelphia, for the Opening Statement of the Defense Counsel.

[darph nader]

Come on Mr.Wombat (esquire). Come to the aid of a lowly wild canine. We're waiting.

[vixen101485]

LOL...wow...not sure whether I have to be sober or drunk to read that one. I will wait till the little brat is asleep tonite. (if she lives that long) Might need Wombat for a defense lawyer myself soon. ARRRGHH!

[hobie16]

I will wait till the little brat is asleep tonite. (if she lives that long) Might need Wombat for a defense lawyer myself soon.

Ahhhhh, the joys of parenting. Wait until the teenage years. That's when it gets very interesting. Sex, drugs, rock 'n' roll.

[vixen101485]

LOL...been there done that. This one is number 2 female child. The other one is 22 years old and lives out in Los Angeles.

[hobie16]

I've got a 22 year old in Southern Oregon who's returning to college after a lost year.

Next up is our boy, 20, who works at Safeway in Lahaina. He's disabled but other that medical issues, probably gave us the least trouble.

Last, but not least, is our fourteen year old daughter who drives us nutz. She knows it all and doesn't hesitate to make sure we know it. Come on college!!!

[GRUMPY PIRATE]

I've got a 22 year old in Southern Oregon who's returning to college after a lost year.

Next up is our boy, 20, who works at Safeway in Lahaina. He's disabled but other that medical issues, probably gave us the least trouble.

Last, but not least, is our fourteen year old daughter who drives us nutz. She knows it all and doesn't hesitate to make sure we know it. Come on college!!!

Interesting lawsuit!!!

DS 34 in country, combat medic
DD 32, GVMT WORKER (didn't have grey hair until her 13th birthday!!)

[Big Wallaby]

I've got a 22 year old in Southern Oregon who's returning to college after a lost year.

Next up is our boy, 20, who works at Safeway in Lahaina. He's disabled but other that medical issues, probably gave us the least trouble.

Last, but not least, is our fourteen year old daughter who drives us nutz. She knows it all and doesn't hesitate to make sure we know it. Come on college!!!

What school is your 22 y.o. son attending? Former Oregonians need to know...

[hobie16]

What school is your 22 y.o. son attending? Former Oregonians need to know...

Southern Oregon University, Ashland.