The SeaWorld False Advertising Lawsuit

[tjevans]

I laughed along with the podcast crew at this story, but I also think some benefit may come from explaining why the judge did not dismiss what seems to be such a stupid lawsuit.

Although I did not look at the pleadings, it sounds from the Orlando Sentinel article that the motion to dismiss was based on the complaint (the document that initiates a lawsuit) failing to state a claim for which relief may be granted. What that means is that even though the plaintiff may have been injured in some manner by the defendant, the law does not allow for an recovery (an award) based on that injury.

Judges don't just go into these hearings and decide whether they think it's a valid claim or not. The standard for such a motion is that the judge must deny the motion unless he or she can say beyond a reasonable doubt that the plaintiff could not prove any facts in support of the claim. Further, at this stage of the proceedings, the judge cannot look at evidence outside the pleadings. For example, the judge could not consider an affidavit from the trainer that supposedly talked the plaintiff into buying the plush.

If it sounds like a difficult standard to get cases dismissed at this stage, that's because it is. The law gives plaintiffs the benefit of the doubt so they will have a chance to develop their case. It is slightly easier to get a case dismissed (or a summary judgment, but we'll just call that a dismissal) at a later stage.

 

[SorcererHeidi]

Have not finished watching this week's show, but wanted to thank you for breaking down and explaining the "legalese" in a way I can understand and relate to. I always appreciate when Jack does this too, really helpful!

 

[jcb]

Definitely something fishy about this ruling. I thought one other similar lawsuit was previously dismissed. I'll try to clarify soon.

 

[cxcelica]

Definitely something fishy about this ruling. I thought one other similar lawsuit was previously dismissed. I'll try to clarify soon.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-judge-throws-out-seaworld-lawsuit-20151228-story.html

Here's an article on a recent false advertising lawsuit against SeaWorld that was dismissed.

The plaintiffs claimed that they bought their tickets based upon the false advertising that the Orcas were treated well, but when they went to the parks they found the Orcas were in unhealthful conditions.

There was actually three lawsuits based on these similar facts. The judge combined them and then dismissed the case.

 

[Tom P.]

I can understand the explanation that you provided, @tjevans, and I appreciate you doing so. I understand the slippery slope you could potentially go down if the plaintiffs were not given the benefit of the doubt in such matters. However, on an instinctive level, I think many of us just feel like there should be some remedy for lawsuits that are so patently stupid as claiming you were injured by buying a plush Shamoo based on false dorsal fin information from a trainer. Somehow the law needs to recognize a base "that's too stupid to even consider" level for lawsuits.

 

[Princess Jes]

If I buy a simba plush, can I sue Disney because lions don't actually talk at animal kingdom?

 

[rteetz]

If I buy a simba plush, can I sue Disney because lions don't actually talk at animal kingdom?

Oh but simba talks in the festival of the lion king...

 

[pjweaver]

I believe @jcb got The Festival of the Lion King added as part of the settlement against Disney. Jack lost on the Simba plush toy that talked when you puled the string because PETA claimed that string pulling was a gateway to animal abuse.

My ongoing false advertising suit with the movie The Never Ending Story garners no publicity despite how obvious the case is, but say Disney or Sea World and the Florida papers put the story on the front page.

 

[tjevans]

Somehow the law needs to recognize a base "that's too stupid to even consider" level for lawsuits.

I agree, and, at least for the court I work for, it probably would have been dismissed. IIRC, this is pending in a California federal court. Even in federal courts, the courts on the west coast tend to be more tolerant of "wacky" claims than in other parts of the country.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

I can understand the explanation that you provided, @tjevans, and I appreciate you doing so. I understand the slippery slope you could potentially go down if the plaintiffs were not given the benefit of the doubt in such matters. However, on an instinctive level, I think many of us just feel like there should be some remedy for lawsuits that are so patently stupid as claiming you were injured by buying a plush Shamoo based on false dorsal fin information from a trainer. Somehow the law needs to recognize a base "that's too stupid to even consider" level for lawsuits.

it is probably a slippery slope to say those cases can't be heard (because what if that ruly applies to something that on the surface seems stupid but when you get all the facts there is some validity?)

Maybe after the fact they can rule that clearly this was stupid and therefor the plaintiff has to cover all of the court costs since they obviously wasted everyone's time - and tax payer money

 

[disneysteve]

If I buy a simba plush, can I sue Disney because lions don't actually talk at animal kingdom?

I remember a TV commercial for a Superman action figure years ago that had small print at the bottom of the screen that said, "Action figure does not actually fly".

 

[Tom P.]

Maybe after the fact they can rule that clearly this was stupid and therefor the plaintiff has to cover all of the court costs since they obviously wasted everyone's time - and tax payer money

I've always advocated for "loser pays" laws in lawsuits to prevent lawsuit abuse. But that is a very controversial subject. Especially among lawyers.

 

[SorcererHeidi]

When I ordered a bunch of pagers at work - WAAAAY back in the day, when people used to carry them (hopefully nobody here is saying "what's a pager? @rteetz - Do NOT make me feel any OLDER than I already DO!!!!!) they came with the instructions "Do not eat the battery door". That immediately made me wonder what knuckle dragging mouthbreather instigated the lawsuit to precipitate that specific instruction being included. Given a moment or two, I started to wonder how tasty the rest of the pager would be, and if anybody had tried to eat the batteries themselves, unless they had terrible GERD, or if that warning was on the battery packages themselves.

 

[SarahDisney]

When I ordered a bunch of pagers at work - WAAAAY back in the day, when people used to carry them (hopefully nobody here is saying "what's a pager? @rteetz - Do NOT make me feel any OLDER than I already DO!!!!!) they came with the instructions "Do not eat the battery door". That immediately made me wonder what knuckle dragging mouthbreather instigated the lawsuit to precipitate that specific instruction being included. Given a moment or two, I started to wonder how tasty the rest of the pager would be, and if anybody had tried to eat the batteries themselves, unless they had terrible GERD, or if that warning was on the battery packages themselves.

This story cracks me up.
Also, if it makes you feel any younger ... I remember pagers.

 

[SorcererHeidi]

Thanx @SarahDisney - I KNEW I liked you!

 

[Princess Jes]

This story cracks me up.
Also, if it makes you feel any younger ... I remember pagers.

Thanx @SarahDisney - I KNEW I liked you!

Sarah, I believe you and I are the same age, and while I recall them, I've no idea what they did/how they worked

 

[SarahDisney]

Sarah, I believe you and I are the same age, and while I recall them, I've no idea what they did/how they worked

Honestly, I know them mostly from TV, but they also used them at the hospital I worked at a few years ago.
It's basically a way of getting in touch with people before cell phones - you call the person's pager, and your number shows up on their screen so that they can find a phone and call you. Now you just call someone's cell phone and skip the middle step. Or text them and tell you to call them. Much easier.

 

[Princess Jes]

Honestly, I know them mostly from TV, but they also used them at the hospital I worked at a few years ago.
It's basically a way of getting in touch with people before cell phones - you call the person's pager, and your number shows up on their screen so that they can find a phone and call you. Now you just call someone's cell phone and skip the middle step. Or text them and tell you to call them. Much easier.

OOOOHHHHH!!! So it was literally a missed call device? Lol, that's funny.
I avoid talking on the phone as much as possible so I wouldn't have been a pager owner I don't think! Lol

 

[samsteele]

Yes . . . I was an undergrad when pagers were the rage & it seemed like all the big adults around me were running for the pay phone/house phone when their pagers went off. When I was in my late 20s, I had one of the first long-range cell phones called a "bag phone". It was housed in a large doctor-sized vinyl bag and resembled a compact wall phone. I was so proud of my bag phone. Of course, now its just history.

 

[disneysteve]

Yes . . . I was an undergrad when pagers were the rage & it seemed like all the big adults around me were running for the pay phone/house phone when their pagers went off. When I was in my late 20s, I had one of the first long-range cell phones called a "bag phone". It was housed in a large doctor-sized vinyl bag and resembled a compact wall phone. I was so proud of my bag phone. Of course, now its just history.

We're way OT but...

I had a pager in med school, internship, and residency, and for quite a few years into practice. The first time I was on call outside of the hospital during residency and had to pull over to answer a page using a cell phone in a really sketchy neighborhood was when I went out and got myself a bag phone. That was in 1991 which made me a pretty early adopter. Once smaller, pocket-size cell phones came along, pagers gradually died out as they really served no purpose. It no longer made sense to pay the monthly charges for the pager and for the phone when the phone was all you really needed.