LITIGATION is big in the US, so you'd hardly think it would make the news. Lawsuits are so common, and for the most ludicrous reasons, so it would be a rare one indeed that would stand out.
But here it is.
Matthew Kohr, of the Raleigh Police Department in North Carolina, is suing Starbucks after a paper coffee cup - full of hot coffee - collapsed and burned him in a particularly precious place.
He's suing Starbucks for $50,000.
The coffee was free.
Apparently, uniformed police in Raleigh are entitled to free coffee at Starbucks, a tradition somewhat endangered by Officer Kohr's legal action. One can only speculate how the tradition started.
Matthew is not alone in this action; his wife is also involved in the suit, saying the hot coffee deprived her of "a source of emotional support, her social companion and her intimate partner".
The burns have affected his ability to perform in the bedroom department.
Kohr also claims that the burns were so bad they aggravated his Crohn's disease, which resulted in surgery to remove part of his intestine.
The $50,000 is supposed to cover medical as well as legal fees, so, by US standards, it's not a lot of money, but Starbucks' legal advisers say because the coffee was free Kohr is not entitled to sue.
But why is he suing at all? Starbucks serves 4 billion coffees a year, according to their statistics, and Matthew Kohr stands out because he can't handle a paper cup. Shouldn't Starbucks sue him for bringing their establishment into disrepute? Did he scream and upset nearby patrons? Should they sue Starbucks or Kohr for having their day ruined by groin-crippling dramatics? And who had to clean it up? Are they entitled to sue someone?
The US simply proves you can't legislate against stupidity.
