In order to be fair and balanced with my entries on this site, I just found an example of what I would consider a frivolous lawsuit at least as reported by the media. Before explaining the details, I wanted to say that I still firmly believe that this example reflects but a small portion of the outstanding litigation in our country. In fact, more than anything, I believe that media reports about this lawsuit help tort reform advocates to protect profits and minimize safety and accountability because it can be used as an example of a “frivolous lawsuit.” Well anyhow, on to the facts of this case. We all know that yesterday was Mother’s Day. If you went to a baseball game and were denied a Mother’s Day gift because you are male, you may be a representative plaintiff in a discrimination lawsuit filed in California a week earlier on May 8. Apparently, males were denied some free stuff for a Mother’s Day celebration just before the holiday and were so distraught they decided to file suit. If you prevail, you may be entitled to recover a lost tote bag or reversible bucket hat for which you were apparently wrongfully denied.
Unfortunately, in my opinion, this type of lawsuit gives plaintiffs’ attorneys a bad name. I think this is a frivolous lawsuit because this case does not expose problems with product safety, safe medications, negligent supervision, negligent security or a conscious disregard of substantial and known risk of harm. Instead, I personally think it is an example of using litigation as a tool to primarily make a profit rather than to make a product or service safe.
If anybody working on this case may have different perspective which would support a different conclusion, please let me know. I want to understand why a major league baseball team cannot make a decision to hand out gifts to mothers before Mother’s Day. I promise that I will have an open mind and may change my opinion after reviewing your position. Click here for the story about this recent lawsuit.