• Ongoing coronavirus / COVID-19 discussion: how is the pandemic affecting your community, workplace, and wellness? 🦠

    Working from home? So are we. Come join us! Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, planning adjacent topics, and whatever else comes to mind. No ads, no spam, no social distancing.

Waiter, there's a condom in my soup

Rumpy Tunanator

Cyburbian
Messages
4,473
Points
25
Remember to always chew carefully.

LOS ANGELES, California (Reuters) -- Waiter, there is something worse than a fly in my soup.

A California woman who found a condom in her bowl of clam chowder has sued the upscale restaurant that served it to her -- saying she has suffered depression and anxiety from the shocking discovery.

But an attorney for McCormick & Schmicks Seafood Restaurant in Irvine, California, says the eatery has no idea how the condom got into Laila Sultan's food.

Sultan, 48, and her three companions are suing the restaurant for negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress in a case that is expected to go to trial early next year.

"I thought it was calamari or shrimp or something so I chewed one more," Sultan told local KCAL-TV Monday. "It felt rubbery. I told my friends, 'My God, there's something in my mouth."'
Sultan said she spit the offending object into a napkin and at first thought it was a latex glove. Then her friend realized what it was.

"I said, 'Oh, my God' and ran into the bathroom with another friend of mine and I started throwing up," she said. "I threw up everything I ate there, every single thing, I threw up in the bathroom."

But Patrick Stark, an attorney for McCormick & Schmicks, told the Los Angeles Times that its staff had no idea how the condom got into the chowder, adding: "It's as big a mystery to us as it is to anybody else."

"We are going to argue at trial there is absolutely no evidence to suggest the restaurant was the source of the condom," he told the paper. "Either it came from (the four women) or it was thrown in as a practical joke by another patron at the restaurant."

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/West/11/10/condom.soup.reut/index.html
 

Zoning Goddess

Cyburbian
Messages
13,852
Points
39
True story, and so apt just now. Today we came home from vacation and I fixed my son a bowl of spaghetti for lunch, then my mom came over to stay with him while I went to the grocery store. He didn't finish his food, so she put it in a baggie in the fridge. Tonight I reheated it for dinner; when he was done, I picked up the baggie from the kitchen counter. Inside was the rattlesnake rattle from the snake he shot a couple months ago, the one we could not find last week to go with a school report on snakes.

NOW I know where we put the baggie!!

P.S. the food was in a bowl, apparently it didn't actually touch the rattle.
 

steveanne

Member
Messages
176
Points
7
Ranks just above "I'm suing because this place made my kid obese" and just below "I'm suing because I burned myself with coffee that is too hot".
 

Jessie-J

Cyburbian
Messages
386
Points
12
she could have choked on it. I don't know that I'd sue, but i'd get the situation as much attention from the media as possible.
 

Cardinal

Cyburbian
Messages
10,080
Points
34
It makes me wonder. There a too many people who would "plant" the item for the opportunity to sue and make money. If I owned the restaurant, though, I'd probably be asking some employees to take lie detector tests.
 

jordanb

Cyburbian
Messages
3,232
Points
25
steveanne said:
Ranks just above "I'm suing because this place made my kid obese" and just below "I'm suing because I burned myself with coffee that is too hot".

[ot]That coffee issue was justified. I saw a followup to it. It got blown out of proportion by the media as the banner incident of tort abuse. I have no doubt that there is way too much litigation, but that incident wasn't a bad one.

The lady ended up with 2nd degree burns, and sued just for her medical costs. During the trial, it came out that McDonalds had ignored many complaints by previous people before and (most damning) that it was a corporate policy to make the coffee that hot. They found an internal study done by McDonalds that showed that customers preferred the coffee to be much cooler, but that if they made the coffee that hot, customers were more likely to leave the store without getting a free refill.

The jury granted what she asked and then calculated (using McDonalds's numbers) how much money McDonalds saved over the time that the policy was in place, then fined McDolalds (in PUNITIVE damages) all the money they saved with the policy plus a bit to make it sting. They were perfectly justified in doing that. If punitive damages for things like that don't at least equal the money saved, the companies will just keep on implementing those policies (*boom* goes the Pinto) because they know they'll still make money even when they get caught.[/ot]

Suing for "emotional damages" is still total bullshit though. If she didn't lose a limb or a loved one, she just needs to deal.
 
Top