Reply #76: Maybe $750 or $7500 for nuisance value, but not 75k

[Neil Lisst]

This case is much ado about nothing. Well, it's not about nothing, but it's blown out of proportion. If there is one thing any adult person knows, it is that orders get mixed up, get delivered to the wrong person. This appears to have involved a mistake on the part of the restaurant, but it also suggests the mother has partial responsibility.

There are no damages to speak of, besides the initial medicals. If the child had fallen off his chair and suffered brain damage, it's a million dollar case, but absent real damages, this is grist for the humor mill more than anything else. I'm sure the writers at Jay Leno's show will have fun with it.

Certainly it was a mistake, but the harm was limited to the child getting drunk. That's it.

And where was mom during this? She's got an obligation, a duty, to observe and protect the child. Doesn't she know what a glass of apple juice looks like? Doesn't she pay attention when her kids eat in public?

There is liability, and there is some opportunity for punitives, but there are no real damages to support her claim. She won't win over 10K if it's tried, and probably not that.

Her best opportunity was to settle it without going public. Now that she's gone public and Appleby's has taken the PR hit, she's given them the opportunity to show she's greedy and unreasonable.

And while we're at it, what five year old doesn't act like she described when eating at a restaurant?

This kind of case does real lawsuits and real plaintiffs a serious disservice, and merely allows those who want to limit plaintiffs' cases ammo for their political efforts to limit same.