Berry disappointing

Not a significant source of fruity nutrition or berry things
Not a significant source of fruity nutrition or berry things

Walter Olson:

“Plaintiff did not explain why she could not reasonably have figured this out at any point during the four years she alleged she bought Cap’n Crunch with Crunchberries in reliance on defendant’s fraud.”

Figured out … what?  You have to click the link to find out.  Let’s just say that CRUNCH BERRIES is a trademark and not a generic term.

Next lawsuit?  Couple sues for misrepresentation, claims to have been married at sea by Cap’n Crunch himself, who, it turns out, is not an actual Cap’n.\

UPDATE:  “Duped by the loops made of froot”! Via @MegLG.

Ron Coleman

I write this blog.

6 thoughts on “Berry disappointing

  1. Pingback: Anne Glazer
  2. What kind of plaintiff’s attorney would agree to represent a plaintiff in this harebrained kind of case?

  3. “What kind of plaintiff’s attorney would agree to represent a plaintiff in this harebrained kind of case?”

    Maybe someone who took it on pro bunny.

Comments are closed.