Wile E. Coyote vs Acme

[Bumper]

In the United States District Court, Southwestern District, Tempe, Arizona
Case No. B191294, Judge Joan Kujava, Presiding

Wile E. Coyote, Plaintiff
v.
ACME Company, Defendant

Opening Statement of Harold Schoff, attorney of record for Mr. Coyote:

My client, Mr. Wile E. Coyote, a resident of Arizona and contiguous states, does hereby bring suit for damages against the ACME Company, manufacturer and retail distributor of assorted merchandise, incorporated in Delaware and doing business in every state, district and territory. Mr. Coyote seeks compensation for personal injuries, loss of business income, and mental anguish caused as a direct result of the actions and / or gross negligence of said company, under Title 15 of the United States Legal Code, Chapter 47, Section 2072, Subsection (a), related to product liability.

Mr. Coyote avows that on eighty-five separate occasions he has purchased from the ACME Company (hereinafter referred to as, “Defendant”), through that organization’s mail-order distribution department, certain products which did cause him bodily injury, due to defects in manufacture or improper cautionary labeling. Invoices and bills of lading made out to Mr. Coyote as proof of purchase are at present in the possession of this Court, marked Plaintiff’s Exhibit A. Such injuries as were sustained by Mr. Coyote have temporarily severely limited his ability to pursue his career as a carnivorous predator. Mr. Coyote is self-employed and thus not eligible for benefits and supports under Workman’s Compensation.

Mr. Coyote states that on December 13th, he received of the Defendant, via parcel post, one ACME Rocket Sled. The intention of Mr. Coyote was to employ the Rocket Sled in pursuit of his prey. Upon receipt of the Rocket Sled, Mr. Coyote removed it from its wooden shipping crate and, sighting his prey in the distance, activated the vehicle’s ignition. As Mr. Coyote gripped the handlebars in the manner specified by the instructions, the Rocket Sled accelerated with such sudden and precipitate force as to stretch Mr. Coyote’s forelimbs to a length of fifty feet. Subsequently, the balance of Mr. Coyote’s body shot forward with a violent jolt, causing severe strain to his back and neck and positioning him unexpectedly astride the speeding Rocket Sled. Disappearing over the horizon at such speed as to leave a diminishing jet trail in his wake, the Rocket Sled soon brought Mr. Coyote abreast of his prey. At that moment, the animal he was pursuing veered sharply to the right. Mr. Coyote vigorously attempted to duplicate this maneuver, but was unable to do so, due to the sled’s poorly designed steering and a faulty or apparently nonexistent braking system. Shortly thereafter, the unchecked progress of the Rocket Sled brought it and Mr. Coyote into collision with the side of a mesa.

Paragraph One of the Report of Attending Physician (Plaintiff’s Exhibit B), prepared by Dr. Ernest Grosscup, M.D., D.O., details the multiple fractures, contusions and massive tissue damage suffered by Mr. Coyote as a result of this collision. Treatment of the injuries required a full bandage around the head (excluding the ears), a neck brace, and full or partial casts on all four limbs.

Hampered by these injuries, Mr. Coyote was nevertheless obliged to support himself. With this in mind, he purchased of the Defendant, as an aid to mobility, a pair of rocket skates. When he attempted to use this product, however, he became involved in an accident remarkably similar to that which occurred with the aforementioned Rocket Sled. Again, the Defendant sold over the counter, without caveat, a product which attaches powerful jet engines (in this instance, two) to inadequate vehicles, with little or no provision for passenger safety considerations. Encumbered by his heavy casts, Mr. Coyote lost control of the Rocket Skates soon after strapping them on, and came into collision with a roadside billboard so violently as to leave a hole in the display in the shape of his full silhouette.

Mr. Coyote further maintains that on occasions too numerous to enumerate in this document, he has suffered mishaps involving explosives purchased from the Defendant; the ACME “Little Giant” Firecracker, the ACME Self-Guided Aerial Bomb, etc. (For a more complete listing, see the ACME Mail Order Explosives Catalogue and attached deposition, entered into evidence as Plaintiff’s Exhibit C). Indeed, Mr. Coyote has no hesitation in stating that not once has an explosive purchased from the Defendant performed in the advertised and anticipated manner. To cite just one example; at the expenditure of much time and effort, Mr. Coyote constructed a wooden trough around the outer rim of a butte, beginning at the top of the hill and taking a spiral route downward around it to a point some feet above a large black “X” painted on the desert floor. The trough was designed in such a way that a spherical explosive device of a type distributed by the Defendant would roll easily and swiftly down to the point of detonation indicated by the “X”. Mr. Coyote then placed a generous portion of bird seed directly on the “X”, and then, carrying the spherical ACME Bomb (Catalogue #78-832), he climbed to the top of the butte. Mr. Coyote’s prey, seeing the bird seed, approached, and Mr. Coyote proceeded to light the fuse of the explosive. In an instant, the fuse burned down to the stem, causing the bomb to detonate prematurely.

In addition to reducing all Mr. Coyote’s painstaking and careful preparation to naught, the unanticipated discharge of the Defendant’s product resulted in the following disfigurements to Mr. Coyote.

1. Severe singing of the hair on Mr. Coyote’s head, neck and muzzle.
2. Sooty discolouration.
3. Fracture of the left ear at the stem, causing the ear to dangle loosely in the aftershock with a creaking noise.
4. Full or partial combustion of whiskers, producing kinking, frazzling, and ashy disintegration.
5. Radical widening of the eyes, due to brow and lid charring.

We now come to the matter of the ACME Spring-Powered Shoes. The remains of a pair of this footwear purchased by Mr. Coyote on June 23rd are Plaintiff’s Exhibit D. Selected fragments have been forwarded to the metallurgical laboratories of The University Of California at Santa Barbara for analysis and evaluation, but to date no explanation has been advanced to explain this product’s unexpected and radical malfunction. As advertised by the Defendant, this product is simplicity itself; composed of two wood-and-metal sandals, each attached to tempered steel springs of high tensile strength and compressed into a tightly coiled configuration, restrained by a simple locking device with a lanyard release mechanism. Mr. Coyote believed this product would enable him to pounce upon his prey in the initial moments of the chase, when swift reflexes are at a premium.

To increase the shoes’ thrusting power even further, Mr. Coyote affixed them by their bottoms to the side of a large boulder. Adjacent to the boulder was a pathway which Mr. Coyote’s prey was known to frequent. Mr. Coyote put his hind feet into the wood-and-metal sandals and crouched in readiness, his right forepaw holding firmly to the trigger apparatus. Within a short time, Mr. Coyote’s prey did indeed appear on the pathway coming towards him. Unsuspecting, the prey stopped near Mr. Coyote, well within range of the springs at full extension. Mr. Coyote gauged the distance with care and proceeded to pull the lanyard release.

At this point, the Defendant’s product should have thrust Mr. Coyote forward and away from the boulder. Instead, for reasons not yet established, the ACME Spring Powered Shoes acted in a manner as to propel the boulder away from Mr. Coyote. While the intended prey looked on unharmed, Mr. Coyote remained suspended in the air. Subsequently, the powerful twin springs recoiled, bringing Mr. Coyote to a violent feet-first collision with the boulder, the full weight of his head and forequarters impacting upon his lower extremities.

The force of this collision then caused the springs to rebound, whereupon Mr. Coyote was thrust skyward. A second recoil and impact followed. The boulder, which was roughly spherical in shape, had meanwhile begun to bounce down a hillside, the coiling and uncoiling of the powerful springs adding significantly to its velocity. At each bounce, Mr. Coyote came into contact with the boulder, or the boulder came into contact with Mr. Coyote, or both came into contact with the ground. As the grade was a lengthy one, this process continued for some time.

The sequence of collisions resulted in systemic damage to Mr. Coyote, viz., flattening of the cranium, sideways displacement of the tongue, reduction in length of his legs and upper body, compression of vertebrae from the base of his tail to his head, and soft-tissue injuries too multitudinous to enumerate. The repetition of blows along a vertical axis produced a series of regular horizontal folds in Mr. Coyote’s body tissues - a rare and painful condition which caused Mr. Coyote to expand upward and contract downward alternatively as he walked, and to emit off-key accordion-like wheezing sounds at every step. The distracting and most embarrassing nature of this chronic condition has served as a major impediment to Mr. Coyote’s pursuit of a normal social life.

As the court is no doubt aware, the Defendant has a virtual monopoly on the manufacture and sale of merchandise required for Mr. Coyote’s work. It is our contention the Defendant has used its market advantage to the detriment of the consumers of such specialized products as itching powder, giant kites, two-hundred-foot-long rubber bands, anvils, and Burmese tiger traps. Much as he has come to distrust the Defendant’s goods, Mr. Coyote has no other alternative source of domestic supply to which he may resort. One can only wonder what our trading partners in Western Europe and Asia would make of such a situation, where a giant commercial organization is allowed to victimize the consumer in such a reckless manner, on an ongoing basis.

Mr. Coyote respectfully requests that the court regard these larger economic implications and assess punitive damages in the amount of seventeen million dollars. In addition, Mr. Coyote seeks actual damages (missed meals, medical expenses, days lost from his professional occupation) of one million dollars; general damages (mental suffering, injury to reputation) of twenty million dollars; and recovery of legal fees of seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars. Total damages; thirty-eight million seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars. By awarding Mr. Coyote the full amount in question, this Court will censure the Defendant, its directors, officers, shareholders, successors, and assigns, in the only language they apparently understand, and reaffirm the right of the individual predator to equal protection under the law.

[Heather]

Bumper, I wish I could live in your world. But to tell the truth, I'm a little afraid I couldn't handle it.

[Bumper]

Stay tuned, Heather. Later today, or tomorrow, the sequel.