Post-Sabri Section 666 Challenge Fails
Mike Ross Has A Right To Choose

Sue the Plaintiff

A month or so ago, a woman claimed to have found a finger in her bowl of Wendy's chili.  Thinking people were skeptical: how could a finger appear in chili?  Unlike a booger, a prankster can't flick a finger into a bowl of chili.  And unlike a band-aid, fingers don't just fall off. 

Ultimately, the woman dropped her lawsuit.  Last night she was arrested for filing a flase report.

Good for the police.  Filing a frivolous lawsuit harms injured plaintiffs, as the taint attaches to valid claims.   What's worse, according to this story:

Sales have dropped at franchises in Northern California, forcing layoffs and reduced hours, the company said.

The victims are the employees who can't return to work because Wendy's chili is associated with something Leatherface would have cooked up.  I wonder how many rent payments will be missed because of this foul woman?  Wendy's and trial lawyers need to unite.  This loathesome creature needs to be held to answer.

I think Wendy's should sue the vexatious plaintiff, seeking lost profits and reputational damage.  Moreover, ATLA and individual trial lawyers should stand behind Wendy's.  If you file a frivolous lawsuit, the next defendant appearing in court will be you.

If trial lawyers don't take a firm stand against this woman, her stench will rightfully attach to them.  Though sadly, injured clients will be the ones to suffer.