Mutant Cereal and the Law
Some people will stop at nothing to make a few bucks.
I just recently learned about a lawsuit in which plantiff Janine
Sugawara complained that Crunchberries (the cereal) contained no actual
berries and wanted, well, money. An exegesis of this case in the
Lowering The Bar legal blog is well worth reading. Here is an
In this case . .
. while the challenged packaging contains the word "berries" it does so
only in conjunction with the descriptive term "crunch." This Court is
not aware of, nor has Plaintiff alleged the existence of, any actual
fruit referred to as a "crunchberry." Furthermore, the "Crunchberries"
depicted on the [box] are round, crunchy, brightly-colored cereal balls,
and the [box] clearly states both that the Product contains "sweetened
corn & oat cereal" and that the cereal is "enlarged to show texture."
Thus, a reasonable consumer would not be deceived into believing that
the Product in the instant case contained a fruit that does not exist. .
. . So far as this Court has been made aware, there is no such fruit
growing in the wild or occurring naturally in any part of the world.
Hallelujah! For once, in this legal quagmire that
is the United States, a judge makes a commonsense ruling against a
frivolous lawsuit. Which gives me hope for the success of mine.
last time we visited my breakfast cereal of choice, the Bite Size
Frosted Mini-Wheat Lightly Sweetened Whole Grain Wheat Cereal, we
discussed at length the Reward of the Residue ceremony and the
lack of tribological scintillation in the exemplars I scrutinized.
I also failed to identify any numina in the cereal items themselves that
would make me an eBay millionaire. But we can hardly charge the
manufacturer with that; the cereal box nowhere says "Now, With
Stigmata!" in large type.
||What they do claim however, and prominently so, is that each
wheat is "bite size." Imagine my shock, then when I discovered
that my favorite cereal had committed fraud.
||The middle Wheat, similar in size to most of its cohorts is,
indeed, bite size. But look at the surrounding Wheats:
It's as if two normal specimens have joined to form a monster.
Clearly the package should have been labeled "Monsters
Inside!" or, at the very least, "Bonus: Now with
Clearly we consumers are being treated
with derision and this must not be allowed to pass without legal
action. This is still America.
I'm going to contact my class-action lawyer right away.
I feel it would be best to avoid the courtroom of Judge England, the
jurist in the Crunchberry case. Although I do believe he
reached the correct decision there, that doesn't necessarily mean he
isn't in the pay of the cereal lobby. Worse, he may enjoy Wheats
for breakfast and won't want the price to increase based on his
If you are like many blinkered conservatives who feel
that "consumerism" is getting a bit silly, you should be aware that I am
not seeking enormous damages in this case. The "relief" for which
I will be petitioning the court is simply that they pay someone to come
to my home every morning to check my breakfast lid and separate any
conjoined Wheats found therewithin. I am not asking for a
full-time person by any means. I think that $100 on every day
ending in "y," i.e., days on which I have breakfast, would suffice.
I am a person of moderate demands and temperate demeanor. If you
don't believe that, consider this item I found on the same Wheats
package photographed for this article:
||Would anyone else let that go by without legal action?
What if a kid suddenly became 25% more attentive. (And
would anyone want a kid to be that attentive?)
about the Wheat with the eyes, arms, and legs. Despite their being depicted as part of the
package, not a single gesticulating, talking Wheat can be found
in the box.
"Long John Silver"
The Ariel story is only partly mine to tell.
Some other time, perhaps.