The U.S. has been the undisputed lawsuit capital of the world for some time.  And while the courts play a central role in resolving disputes and maintaining a civil society, that function isn’t easy when they are packed with frivolous suits. 

Ridiculous lawsuits clog up our legal system’s dwindling resources, taking time away from legitimate grievances to devote to the vindictive, the hypocritical, the irresponsible, and the outright absurd. 

With that in mind, FacesOfLawsuitAbuse.org has compiled some of the most egregious examples of frivolous and abusive litigation from around the country and asked you to tell us which ones were the most ridiculous. These suits range from the comical and absurd to the disturbing, but they all underscore a real problem – lawsuits hurt businesses, families, and everyday Americans through lost time, money and job growth.  

So which lawsuits are the doozies this past year? First, here’s the lawsuit that you thought was the most ridiculous:

• Convict sues couple he kidnapped for not helping him evade police. A man who kidnapped a couple at knifepoint while he was running from the police is now suing the victims, claiming that they promised to hide him in exchange for an unspecified amount of money.  The plaintiff, currently in jail, is seeking $235,000 for the alleged “breach of contract.” 

And here’s the rest of the top ten as determined by you who voted at FacesOfLawsuitAbuse.org:

• Man suing for age discrimination says judge in his case is too old. A 60-year-old musician who is suing for age discrimination wants the judge removed from the case – because he’s too old.  Ironically, the plaintiff says his fight against age-based discrimination is too important to leave in the hands of the 88-year-old judge.
• Young adults sue mother for sending cards without gifts and playing favorites. The plaintiffs, now 20 and 23, claimed the mother “sometimes didn’t include gifts in cards sent to her children; played favorites with her children . . . did not send care packages until his sixth semester away at college . . . changed her surname, thus ‘causing attention’ at her daughter’s school events; and refused to buy her a homecoming dress.”
• Obese man sues burger joint over tight squeeze in booths. A nearly-300 pound man is suing White Castle restaurants, saying that their booths are too tight to accommodate someone of his size.  In fact, he’s so distraught by the booths that he hasn’t been to White Castle in months (instead, he sends his wife to pick up his burgers so he can eat them at home).
• Woman sues over movie trailer; says not enough driving in ‘Drive’. A Michigan woman who claims she was misled by the trailers for the movie ‘Drive’ is suing the distributors of the film.  She says she was disappointed by the lack of driving in the film and was expecting something more similar to the ‘Fast and Furious’ films.
• Mom files suit against exclusive preschool over child’s college prospects. A New Yorker is suing a private preschool, saying the school’s curriculum has seriously hurt her 4-year-old’s chances of getting into an Ivy League college.
• Man sues bar for not disarming him before he started drinking (and fighting). A Pennsylvania man illegally brought a gun into a bar, then got injured in a drunken shootout with another patron, and now has sued the bar for not searching him for a weapon on his way in.
• Passenger’s lawsuit says cruise ship was too fast. An Indiana woman is suing Carnival Cruise Line, claiming she got sick because the boat was going too fast and was swaying from side to side.
• Woman disagrees with store over 80¢ refund, sues for $5m. A New York woman decided to make a $5 million federal case out of a disagreement over 80¢.  Her suit says she used a $5-off coupon when she purchased a bevy of items for over $100.  When she returned one of the items, the store pro-rated the refund to account for the discount.
• Mother sues Chuck E. Cheese – says games encourage gambling in children. A California woman has filed a lawsuit against Chuck E. Cheese on the grounds that their games are actually an illegal form of gambling and could get kids hooked. She is seeking at least $5 million; the restaurant says the games are legal and has asked a judge to dismiss the suit.

Thanks to everyone who took the time to vote.  And while we can’t predict everything 2012 has in store, it’s a good bet there’ll be more ridiculous lawsuits. So remember to visit FacesOfLawsuitAbuse.org monthly to vote for your favorite ridiculous lawsuits.

The writer filed a $2.5 billion lawsuit against the maker of the science fiction film, saying that he originally came up with the idea for a movie with “bioluminescent flora/plant life, unbreathable atmospheres, matriarch support of hero vs. heroine, spiritual connections to environment and reincarnation, appearance of mist in scene, sunlight to moonlight, crackling from gargantuan foliage, blue skin/green skin and battle scene on limbs/branches.”

A PlayStation user is suing Sony over a provision in the user agreement that requires any disputes to be resolved in arbitration instead of court.

An Illinois man who says he hurt his tooth while eating a peanut butter sandwich is suing the maker of the peanut butter and the store where he purchased it.

A federal judge has allowed a suit against Facebook to move forward.  The suit claims that Facebook’s “like” ads (that tell you when a friend “likes” a page, product, company) violate California’s publicity statute.

What could make a judge wax poetic about “misty watercolor memories” and “scattered pictures of the smiles . . . left behind?”  A lawsuit over a wedding.  Or rather, a lawsuit to recreate a wedding. 

A groom who tied the knot eight years ago decided that he was unhappy with the pictures and videos of his big day and is suing the photographer that he hired.  In addition to a full refund for the photos, the groom wants $48,000 more so he can fly in family and friends to recreate the entire wedding.  That might be easier said than done, considering that he and his wife have since divorced, and she returned to her native Latvia.  The erstwhile groom’s suit is one of the nominees in this month’s Most Ridiculous Lawsuit of the Month poll.  The others:

Here’s a riddle: Say a group of three liquored-up friends steal a car, go for a drunken joyride, then get hurt when they inevitably crash the car.  Who gets sued?  The car’s 91-year-old owner, who was on vacation at the time of the theft.  The plaintiffs, who were passengers in the stolen car, say the thief was hired to do occasional odd jobs for the defendant and should thus be considered an employee the night of the crash.  Despite the fact that the thief was convicted of unauthorized use of a motor vehicle, among other charges, the plaintiffs still think the car’s owner should be held liable for their injuries.

Another nominee is taking Playboy to court over the company’s alleged favoritism towards women.  Apparently, the plaintiff paid $1,000 to get into a “Leathers Meets Lace” party at the legendary Playboy Mansion, while “gorgeous ladies” were let in for free.  The plaintiff calls the practice discriminatory (similar suits against Ladies Night promotions have been dismissed).

A couple that was held at knifepoint by a fugitive while he was running from the police is being victimized by their attacker again – in court.  The kidnapper, currently serving a 10-year sentence, says that the couple fed him and watched movies with him to put him at ease.  He says he offered them a undisclosed amount of money if they would help him escape.  Eventually he was caught by the authorities, which he claims breached the “contract” he made with his victims.  The convict/plaintiff is suing the couple for $235,000.

And last but not least, a New York lawyer is suing his health club after the club stopped offering complimentary breakfasts to members.  The lawyer wants $230,000 in damages for the missed meals, plus an additional $500,000 for what he says was a “libelous comment” from a club employee.

So which of these suits in the most ridiculous?  You can vote for your favorite at FacesOfLawsuitAbuse.org.  In case you missed it, here’s the winner from last month:  the Michigan woman who sued the makers of the movie ‘Drive,’ saying she was deceived by the trailers into thinking the movie would be more like the ‘Fast and the Furious’films.

Be sure to keep an eye out for our upcoming Most Ridiculous Lawsuit of the Year poll, which will feature some of the most egregious lawsuits from 2011.  And visit FacesOfLawsuitAbuse.org regularly throughout the new year for even more examples of ridiculous plaintiffs bringing ridiculous suits.

A personal injury law firm that filed a $10 million lawsuit on behalf of an injured woman is in the awkward position of saying she didn’t have a case in the first place.  According to the former client’s legal malpractice suit, the firm allowed the statute of limitations to expire, but the firm says the original personal injury suit was meritless. So either the woman’s claim was valid and the firm dropped the ball, or they filed a spurious lawsuit in the hopes of a payout.

A man who kidnapped a couple at knifepoint while he was running from the police is now suing the victims, claiming that they promised to hide him in exchange for an unspecified amount of money.  The plaintiff, currently in jail, is seeking $235,000 for the alleged “breach of contract.”

A man who paid $1,000 to get into a party at the Playboy mansion is now suing the organizers, saying it is discriminatory to charge men while allowing “gorgeous women” to attend for free.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected a proposed class action settlement that would have given nothing to 66 million plaintiffs and nearly $110,000 to a collection of charities, including one that is affiliated with the lower court judge who originally approved the settlement.

Irony.  It’s defined as a result that is the opposite of what is or might be expected or considered appropriate.  Like when somebody who is fighting against ageism wants to remove a judge from his case for being too old.  That lawsuit is one of the nominees in this month’s most ridiculous lawsuit poll.

A 60-year-old musician is suing the group that ran the Young Concert Artists competition (entrants must be between 19 and 26) for age discrimination.  The organizers made an exception – after he threatened to sue – and allowed him to play in the opening auditions but cut him after a “’less than stellar” performance.

So he filed suit saying that he was discriminated against based on his age. Then he discovered that the judge assigned to his case was 88 years old.  In a ploy oozing with hypocrisy, the plaintiff moved to have the judge dismissed because he was too old.  The fight against age-based discrimination is too important to leave in the hands of the elderly judge said the plaintiff, although he did add that the judge “may have been a very learned jurist in his day” (emphasis added).  Geez, thanks for the compliment.

Another nominee for this month’s poll is also going to court over her age.  An unnamed 40-year-old actress is suing the website IMDB, saying the site seriously damaged her career prospects when it (accurately) published her age.  She says she looks younger than she is, so she has traditionally been cast in more youthful roles.  The defendant responds that the “plaintiff’s attempt to manipulate the federal court system so she can censor IMDb.com’s display of her birthdate and pretend to the world that she is not 40 years old is selfish, contrary to the public interest and a frivolous abuse of this court’s resources.” 

The plaintiff is suing for $1 million for the future work she will lose now that producers know her real age.  Incidentally, she credits her profile on IMDB for helping her land jobs when she was an unknown actress trying to break into the business.  Ironic.

Are either of these suits the most ridiculous lawsuit from the past month?  Or is it one of these?

• Woman sues over movie trailer; says not enough driving in ‘Drive’
• Suit claims placebo containing no medication caused rash
• Lawsuit says SeaWorld “enslaves” whales

Vote here.

Lawyers are asking for $8.6 million in fees and costs for their work on the case that resulted in a $27.5 million settlement, leaving $19 million to be split among 24 million class members – less than a dollar per customer.

Whales are people, too!  At least, according to a lawsuit from an animal rights group.

PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) is suing SeaWorld on behalf of five killer whales that are part of the park’s aquatic performances, hoping to extend Constitutional rights to animals.  Specifically, they think that the 13th amendment, which outlawed (human) slavery in 1865, should also include protecting the orcas from involuntary servitude.

Professor David Steinberg of the Thomas Jefferson School of Law told Reuters that the suit is “patently, absolutely frivolous.”  He added that “PETA is demeaning the integrity and humanity of people who were owned as slaves.”

This isn’t the first time PETA has crossed the line.  Their founder once boasted that “even if animal research resulted in a cure for AIDS, we would be against it,” and they even went so far as to run a campaign comparing eating meat to the Holocaust.

This particular suit ultimately wants the park to release the quintet of orcas to a suitable habitat.  But, according to studies, animals released to the wild after they have been accustomed to a relatively safe life in captivity struggle to readapt.  They can’t socialize with other members of their species and haven’t developed the necessary fear of predators.  They face a higher risk of disease than their wild counterparts and aren’t capable of finding a way to feed themselves.  So if the whales are released and their living standard drops, would the orcas have another suit . . . against PETA?

Is this the most ridiculous lawsuit from the past month?  Or is it one of these?

• 40-year-old actress suing website for revealing her age
• Woman sues over movie trailer; says not enough driving in ‘Drive’
• Man suing for age discrimination says judge in his case is too old
• Suit claims placebo containing no medication caused rash

Click here to vote.

A personal injury lawyer sued his health club after the club stopped offering complimentary breakfasts to members.  The lawyer wants $230,000 in damages for the missed meals, plus an additional $500,000 for what he says was a “libelous comment” from an club employee.

An inmate who is serving a life sentence has sued the Department of Corrections on the grounds that the soy and poultry diet that is served to inmates is cruel and unusual punishment.

Two passengers who were hurt during a drunken joyride in a stolen car are suing the 91-year-old owner of the car – who was on vacation when the car was swiped.

A California woman says that Justin Bieber is the father of her baby and is suing the pop star for child support.  She says she met him backstage at a concert when he was 16 and she was 19 (interestingly, if her allegations are true, she may be opening herself to statutory rape charges, given that the age of consent in California is 18).

A man unhappy with his wedding photos is suing the photographers for a refund of $4,100 – and an additional $48,000 to completely restage the wedding with his now ex-wife.

From the Drug and Device Law Blog: “plaintiff alleged that she got a rash from a placebo and she attempted to prove her claim with testimony from her artist-husband and a mold-specialist who hadn’t read her medical records or the clinical study at issue.”

An activist group has sued Sea World, accusing the park of “enslaving” killer whales.  The group says animals should be given the same rights as humans and are therefore protected against involuntary servitude under the 13^th amendment that prohibits slavery.