Insert A Into B: Arlo Lawsuit of the Week
Cidu Bill on Aug 19th 2010
Twenty-four-year-old Pierre Brown, on his way to a cheap motel with his 19-year-old girlfriend, stopped into a New Jersey gas station for condoms. He couldn’t afford a whole box, so the cashier decided to do him a favor by opening the box and selling him a single condom.
Flash forward a few weeks. The woman is pregnant and the gas station is being sued. Because without the directions on the box, Brown didn’t know how to use the condom properly.
Really.
Filed in Arlo Page, Bill Bickel, condoms, lawsuits | 32 responses so far
Detcord Aug 19th 2010 at 12:16 pm 1
The cashier should be sued. He/she facilitated procreation by 2 idiots. If that’s not a capital offense…
Bob Aug 19th 2010 at 12:27 pm 2
Yeah, except the cashier doesn’t have any money. When you’re suing, you always sue the deep pockets. And if the 24-year old guy didn’t know how to use a condom, I guess it was just dumb luck that he managed to properly complete the act of initiating the human procreation process.
Cuddles Aug 19th 2010 at 12:28 pm 3
This is a strong case for improving literacy rates in our schools.
Cornbread Aug 19th 2010 at 12:38 pm 4
I know exactly what happened. They used the condom, worked like a charm, they threw it out, then got horny again and thought it was worth the risk. Later, they contrived this far-fetched scenario because they’d rather be seen as idiots than face up to their own responsibility for what happened.
Detcord Aug 19th 2010 at 12:38 pm 5
Bob, do you really want them suing somebody with money if there is even a chance they will actually get some?
Doug Aug 19th 2010 at 12:51 pm 6
I think the cashier should sue the lawyer of the plaintiff for taking the case.
Lihtox Aug 19th 2010 at 01:00 pm 7
Clever. The lawsuit is despicable, it adds to a culture where employees are denied all free will, and I hope it gets laughed out of court– but I have to admit it’s clever.
pepperjackcandy Aug 19th 2010 at 01:27 pm 8
They used the condom, worked like a charm, they threw it out, then got horny again and thought it was worth the risk.
This.
paperboy Aug 19th 2010 at 01:39 pm 9
Doug#6 has it. Lawyers have no shame.
Minor Annoyance Aug 19th 2010 at 02:35 pm 10
Certainly conceivable that this could be a real case — you can find a lawyer willing to sue on behalf of any claim, hoping at least for a nuisance settlement. But this has just a bit of urban legend stench about it: Cheap idiot fornicators versus a “nice guy” clerk. Nice guy or not, I have a very hard time imagining a clerk opening a box and making it unsalable to sell one condom, rather than just handing the whole box over. And even granting that, it’s an incredibly weak and unprovable claim: Did the clerk ring up that single condom and give a receipt? (He’d probably get fired for anything that odd on the cash register tape.) Can the plaintiffs reasonably assert there were zero other incidents? Even a sleazy lawyer — especially a sleazy lawyer — would look for a larger and easier target; one with more reason to settle. Say, the cheap motel that doesn’t want close scrutiny of its clientele, or any press attention driving the one-nighters tolower-profile lodgings. Barring hard info, I’d file this with the non-existent Guy Who Used Lawnmower as Hedge Trimmer.
Cidu Bill Aug 19th 2010 at 02:50 pm 11
Minor, it is a real case. All the details are cited in the article. But you’re right, it does have all the earmarks of an urban legend (though perhaps the urban legend would gild the lily somewhat).
And Cornbread, I considered the “second time” scenario a given.
Of course, it’s possible that this scenario and the plaintiff’s claim are true, and that the portion of the directions Pierre should have read was “don’t re-use the condom.”
Keera Aug 19th 2010 at 03:58 pm 12
Some of us get to hear we were wanted or an accident. This couple’s kid will hear, “Your mommy and daddy had you on account of your Dad being a typical guy: He didn’t bother to ask for directions.”
Dan W Aug 19th 2010 at 04:01 pm 13
“Yeah, except the cashier doesn’t have any money. When you’re suing, you always sue the deep pockets.”
Exactly. Sue the condom manufacturer for not printing the directions on each condom wrapper. Or on the condom itself…
ty Aug 19th 2010 at 04:01 pm 14
So this is the very first time Mr. Bown has used a condom? He has never purchased a full pack, never had an opportunity to read the instructions before? He can afford a cheap hotel room, but not a pack of condoms?
In a related story, as lung cancer victim sues his buddy for giving him a single cigarette. “Without the warning on the pack, I had no way of knowing that smoking was dangerous,” he claimed.
Minor Annoyance Aug 19th 2010 at 04:50 pm 15
This is the only source I could find for the story:
http://411newyork.org/media/2010/07/07/gas-station-sued-over-a-condom/
The names of the two plaintiffs don’t appear on Google outside of that story.
The dateline is “NEW JERSEY (OCN)”. The only news entity I found with those initials was Orthodox Christian Network, and not surprisingly couldn’t find anything resembling this on their site. I’m guessing it’s meant to be “Open Cubicle News,” as 411newyork’s subtitle is “Open Cubicle - New York State (& City) News™” There are no links or other sources.
While probably not a hoax or scam site, 411newyork doesn’t look very reliable as a news source:
– They have a staff of just four
– Their “About” page opens with “We have numerous articles posted on our site that were contributed by our readers, members and staff . . .” That’s an invitation to write a story and/or a disclaimer.
– Their news content is eccentric, to say the least. Much of it looks like press releases or spam.
Overall, it feels like a small startup dependent on user-provided content, but so far they’ve attracted mainly self-promoters and, in my view, at least one hoaxer.
Can anyone find an alternate source for this story? If it’s real, I’m guessing it appeared earlier somewhere else and was sent to 411newyork.
Apologies for being a jerk on this one, but I’m just a bit wired about people unquestioningly buying into false data, whether it’s a too-funny news story, political flummery or fraudulent medical info.
furrykef Aug 19th 2010 at 05:04 pm 16
Nice guy or not, I have a very hard time imagining a clerk opening a box and making it unsalable to sell one condom, rather than just handing the whole box over.
Who knows, maybe the clerk bought the box so he could use the rest himself.
Dave in Asheville Aug 19th 2010 at 05:51 pm 17
Could the clerk be the only ever recipient of a Reverse Darwin Award? Adding idiots to the gene pool?
Tim Aug 19th 2010 at 07:02 pm 18
This almost makes me in favor of eugenics. Some people are too stupid to breed.
Cidu Bill Aug 19th 2010 at 08:12 pm 19
No jerkiness inferred, Minor, you make a valid point. I still tend to believe it because it doesn’t seem elaborate enough for a deliberate hoax, but you could be correct. And personally, I had similar suspicions last year about that guy who left his cell phone, with nude photos of his wife, in a McDonalds and was suing because some McDonalds employee allegedly put those photos online.
Cidu Bill Aug 19th 2010 at 08:18 pm 20
In his defense, Detcord, the cashier was trying to prevent the procreation.
ShireNomad Aug 19th 2010 at 09:53 pm 21
Wow. My college health department handed out individual condoms all the time. Think of all the plaintiffs…
Mark M Aug 19th 2010 at 10:12 pm 22
I tend to agree with Minor Annoyance here. And even if it is true, there’s still no basis for a lawsuit since condoms aren’t 100% reliable even when used properly.
Jeff S. Aug 19th 2010 at 10:40 pm 23
He used it once… turned it inside out… and used it again. If it works for his underwear, he figured it worked like that for everything.
The directions are pretty simple: Insert. Insert. Remove… InsertRemove… InsertRemoveInsertRemoveInsertRemoveInsertRemoveInsertRemove… Remove. Remove. Dispose.
Seth Finkelstein Aug 20th 2010 at 02:50 am 24
I agree with Minor Annoyance too - hoax.
Red flag: Note in the story, the supposed man’s name is linked to a myspace page (though the page doesn’t seem to exist anymore). I suspect one of his friends was pranking this guy.
Detcord Aug 20th 2010 at 03:09 am 25
Cidu Bill (20)
“In his defense, Detcord, the cashier was trying to prevent the procreation.”
With just One condom? Red rag to a bull IMO. I think Cornbread and Minor Annoyance have given rational answers to your post, which I was hoping was a send-up. Really, really hoping!
chuckers Aug 20th 2010 at 05:28 am 26
“Sue the condom manufacturer for not printing the directions on each condom wrapper. Or on the condom itself…”
Wrapper I could understand. Putting directions on the condom would be difficult. Once it is “unfurled(?)” it is a whole lot harder to put on.
mitch4 Aug 20th 2010 at 08:41 am 27
“If you can read this, you are doing it wrong!”
Christine Aug 20th 2010 at 09:02 am 28
I thought that there were instructions on the condom wrappers (of course they do include “see ful directions”… And shouldn’t they sue their high school, for not forcing them to re-do health class when they obviously skipped some important classes?
And this is why retail workers have no authority to do anything. Because of what the cashier did, the chain is getting sued.
FeelinOld Aug 20th 2010 at 06:30 pm 29
Mitch4 #27
Reminds me of an old joke, about condom serial numbers, but modified for this situation:
What? You’ve never seen the instructions on the condom? I guess you don’t have to roll it out far enough…
Bob Peters Aug 20th 2010 at 06:57 pm 30
Tim #18, ever see Idiocracy? This would qualify as one of the ways that could happen.
minorannoyance Aug 21st 2010 at 02:57 am 31
Ancient joke: Girl from boondocks gets a job as a maid. She spots a used condom in the master bedroom and screams. The lady of the house is amused. “You’ve never seen one of these?,” she asks.
“Yes, Ma’am, plenty of them. But back home we don’t SKIN ‘em!”
Ooten Aboot Aug 21st 2010 at 06:44 am 32
Following the link provided by Minor Annoyance #15: Markham, Donnelly & Associates, the supposed couple’s law firm, appears to be a fake firm name is also used in a phishing scam. Y’all could google it.