contaminated starbucks cups

There are some legitimately appalling cases involving foreign objects in food—the woman who said she found a severed fingertip in her Chinese chicken salad at Applebee's, the guy who discovered a used condom in his French onion soup, the man who said he found two dead baby geckos in his can of Heineken beer.

There's even a slang term for it: “Mealbreaker,” which The Huffington Post defines as “a nasty, non-edible surprise found in food while it is being eaten; often lawsuit-provoking, sometimes fabricated, always disgusting.”

And then there's the latest such case against Starbucks, as reported by The Washington Post—not to mention People Magazine, local network affiliates, The New York Daily News and about 100 more outlets.

A California family sued the company in San Bernardino Superior Court for selling “dangerous, defective, contaminated, tainted, spoiled and unsafe beverages.”

The plaintiffs said that they found blood smears on the cups of their hot White Chocolate Mocha, Java Chip Frappuccino and ice water, including on the inside rim of one cup. Their lawyer, Stan Pekler of Frish Law Group​ in Tarzana, California, provided photos (see above), but let's just say the amount of supposed blood is underwhelming.

Pekler did not respond to a request for comment.

The plaintiffs claimed they “could smell the scent of iron and immediately knew it was blood. … The thought of ingesting a stranger's blood was disturbing, distressing, and nauseating.”

When they called the store, they said Starbucks acknowledged an employee had been bleeding. Starbucks apologized and offered them free drinks, then $1,000 apiece.

Without citing any specifics, the plaintiffs said they “were seriously injured in their health, strength and activity, sustaining injury to the body and shock and injury to the nervous system and person, all of which said injuries have caused, and continue to cause Plaintiffs great physical, mental and nervous pain, suffering and anguish.”

They got tested for HIV and other diseases—negative—but the process “created further stress, anxiety, and worry.”

So… I read this suit and was not exactly overcome with sympathy for the plaintiffs and their great pain.

It's not just me. If the comments section for the Post story is any indication, their lawyer probably doesn't want to take this one to a jury.

Many of the commenters were fixated on the fact that the family's 2-year-old daughter drank half of the Java Chip Frappuccino, which contains coffee.

“If she's so worried about this kid, why is she feeding the kid Java Chip Frappuccino?” was a typical sentiment.

“Seems the parents should be the ones getting sued,” wrote another person. “I can understand the parents being upset, but it seems a coupon for two cups of coffee should have handled it. Trying to hit the lawsuit lottery jackpot seems like overkill.”

One commenter defended the parents. Sort of. “There are just so many other things to judge and mock here why must we nitpick parenting yet again?”

Like the claim that family members smelled the blood.

“Oh, give me a break,” one commenter wrote. “They smelled a tiny smear of blood? I work in an ER—it takes a lot of blood before you smell it. And you do not catch HIV this way.”

Or another: “The family should have a DNA test done. On themselves. They must be part bloodhound to detect an 'odd, metallic smell' from a smudged cup.”

And people wondered how they even ingested the blood.

“If it was on the outside of the cup, how did they drink the blood? They give you straws.”

“That is a smudge of blood, like from a paper cut, not an arm torn open. On the outside of the cup. How are they claiming the mocha was made that the barista's fingers were in the cup?”

Was it even blood anyway?

“You know what also looks like a bloody finger print? Raspberry syrup, chocolate syrup, raspberry tea base, and strawberry drink base.”

And even if it was blood, some said get over it.

“Guarantee everyone's ingested some blood when you eat out. Kitchens have knives ya know.” 

Or this reaction, from an observer who clearly knows his way around a lawsuit.

“Failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted' seems to describe this one to a T. What, exactly, have the plaintiffs suffered? They were grossed out? BFD.”

 

LSC Back on the Chopping Block

President Trump in his 2019 budget plan released Monday wants to eliminate funding for the Legal Services Corp.—again.

In his 2018 budget proposal, the president also tried to shutter the LSC, which funds free civil legal services for the poor.

It didn't fly. Members of the legal community, business leaders, state attorneys general and state legislators all stepped up to defend the organization, bombarding Congress with letters of support. Even University of Michigan football coach Jim Harbaugh came to the LSC's defense, tweeting it is “CRUCIAL to making [the] justice system fair.”

In the end, Congress kept LSC's 2018 budget steady at $385 million.

Now, it's time to fight for LSC's existence all over again.

“I am optimistic that Congress will continue to fund LSC, because LSC promotes the most fundamental of American values—equal justice under law,” said LSC President Jim Sandman in a news release on Monday.

He noted that “just last week Congress voted to give LSC an additional $15 million to fund legal services for victims of recent natural disasters. LSC has had broad bipartisan support on Capitol Hill for more than 40 years. And we have it now.”

LSC Board Chair John Levi added, “Our grantees in every congressional district across the country provide services to low-income Americans that go to the heart of their security and well-being—survivors of domestic violence seeking protections from their abusers, victims of natural disasters trying to obtain appropriate relief, veterans collecting benefits they have earned, the elderly protecting their assets from scams, and so much more.”

 

Every State AG Asks Congress to Ban Forced Arbitration of Sexual Harassment Claims

Attorneys general from every state and U.S. territory wrote to the leaders of the House and Senate on Monday, asking them to enact legislation banning forced arbitration of sexual harassment claims.

“While there may be benefits to arbitration provisions in other contexts, they do not extend to sexual harassment claims,” all 56 AGs wrote in a rare, unified call for action that feels like a sign of a sea change.

“Victims of such serious misconduct should not be constrained to pursue relief from decision makers who are not trained as judges, are not qualified to act as courts of law, and are not positioned to ensure that such victims are accorded both procedural and substantive due process,” they continued. “Additional concerns arise from the secrecy requirements of arbitration clauses, which disserve the public interest by keeping both the harassment complaints and any settlements confidential.”

In December, Microsoft abolished its policy that required some employees to arbitrate sexual harassment complaints, and became the first Fortune 100 company to back legislative change.

The Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Harassment Act was introduced in December, and is co-sponsored by Rep. Cheri Bustos, D-Ill. and Senators Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., and Kamala Harris, D-Calif., as well as Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. and Reps. Walter Jones, R-N.C., and Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y.

See also 56 Attorneys General Urge Congress to End Forced Arbitration in Workplace Sexual Harassment

 

Lateral Watch

Covington & Burling has nabbed Securities & Exchange Commission veteran enforcer Gerald Hodgkins as a partner in Washington, D.C.

Hodgkins oversaw more than 100 SEC enforcement actions, including against WorldCom Inc. and its executives; former UnitedHealth Group Inc. CEO William McGuire; and Daimler AG.

For more, see SEC Enforcer Hodgkins Lands at Covington & Burling

 

What I'm Reading

Federal Judge Appoints Leadership in Equifax MDL

Round up the usual suspects.

Weinstein Lawsuit Positions New York AG for Key Role in Victim Compensation

New York AG Eric Schneiderman could upend the sale of the Weinstein Co. in a bid to ensure that victims of Harvey Weinstein's alleged sexual abuse are compensated.

Judge Rules No Infringement in Battle Over Law Firm Names

With hard-to-pronounce partner surnames like Paranjpe and Mahadass at one Houston firm and Mostaghimi and Papapavlou at another, it's not surprising that the two personal injury firms would use the initials P and M in their firm names.

'Sexy' IP Issue Dominates Cisco-Arista Appeal

Fifty shades of assignor estoppel.

Skadden Partner Michael Scudder Picked for Seventh Circuit Seat

Awesome quote from James Comey in 2010 about Scudder: “He is somebody who can easily be overlooked in a crowded room of loud lawyers because he is so quiet. But once you get to know him, when Mike Scudder speaks, you shut your mouth and you listen.”

Controversial $225M ExxonMobil Settlement Upheld by Appellate Division

Democrats and environmental activists in New Jersey said the amount was too low.

'Hyundai' Case Recharges Debate Over Class Action Approval Standards

A smart look by my colleague Amanda Bronstad at an issue that seems ripe for Supreme Court review.