I for one have never been to a “Buffalo Wild Wings” outlet. Never had much of an interest, although chicken and fried chicken is my favorite food. Maybe it is just their name, I can make “wings” at home, and I have seen some advertisements and their prices are ridiculously expensive.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/buffalo-wild-wings-admits-boneless-wings-not-wings-after-lawsuit-its-true

Some moron is suing this company because of the claim (which is true) that the “boneless wings” are not chicken wings at all, so this would be false advertisement. Ok….

My question would be why such frivolous and stupid lawsuits like this are allowed? I know the legal profession loves Latin terms, what’s Latin for “Who gives a -bleep-!” It is sort of like if I had a BBQ joint which sold “Dinosaur ribs”, do I have to worry about some jackass suing me since the ribs did not come from a literal dinosaur?

Lawsuits should be always used to correct a harm given and sanctions imposed for the harm. For “Buffalo Wild Wings” to sell “Boneless wings” which didn’t come from a wing of a chicken to be frivolous and stupid. This clogs up the legal system. I suppose the lawyers like these idiot lawsuits because it makes them money. I would think however the court system is fairly backed up and busy with real cases and don’t want to concern themselves with stupid crap like this. If I was a judge, I would have told the litigant to “get a life”, and admonished him for the waste of time and resources.

There has been other similar asinine lawsuits concerning food.

1. Soft serve ice cream isn’t legally ice cream. Something having to do with the cream or fat content. Some moron like above sued to make this a thing. I doubt any legislator went “Hey, soft serve isn’t ice cream! We must stop their lies!”

2. Pringles isn’t legally potato chips, because of the way Pringles and similar brands are manufactured. Again, some moron like above sued to make this a thing. I doubt any legislator ever went “Pringles are not potato chips! We must stop their lies!”

Still have zero interest in Buffalo Wild Wings. Maybe someone else can sue them since their location isn’t in Buffalo and buffaloes don’t have wings. We must stop their lies!

1) They might get lucky and get some out of court settlement.

2) There's no penalty in the US for filing frivolous lawsuits, as there should be. Other countries have them.


Sometimes undeserving lawsuits are referred to as the "ghetto lottery".

There was a change made many years ago now, where Pringles stopped being called "chips" (change to crisps). I think the Potato Chip & Snack Food Association was involved in that. They are made from rehydrated potatoes, unlike traditional chips.

Regarding frivolous lawsuits, I always think back to the woman who sued McDonalds after spilling hot coffee on herself. You're a grown woman, did hot, HOT water ever enter your thoughts? I've been called to jury duty on a couple of occasions, it's ridiculous for people's lives to be disrupted by idiotic people in an overly litigious society. In my state, jurors are paid a pittance for their time -- the amounts are now finally up for potential revision.

The "plaintiff" contends that the restaurant is using deceptive marketing practices to market strips of breast meat as being boneless wings in order to charge a higher price. He feels the boneless wings are in reality just "nuggets" and therefore should be priced accordingly.

To me, it seems like he should lose, because "fancy preparation" has always been part of the criteria used to sell in restaurants. Flaming deserts, onion blossoms, etc

But the reality is, lawsuits depend less upon merit than they do the ability of a skillful lawyer to provoke the emotions of a jury. Juries tend to hate deep pockets, and desire to see themselves as heroes giving relief to "victims". Which is why it's so common for these type suits to be settled.

What's next? Do we sue the restaurant because their product contains no buffalo? When was the last time you saw a flying buffalo?

I’m of the mindset that criminals should not be able to sue if they get injured while committing illegal acts.

Example: You shouldn’t be able to sue if you try to break into someone’s house or a store and you fall through the roof.

Me again!

I make fun of the fact that the chain “Steak and Shake” doesn’t sell steaks. Can I sue? I think anyone in America can file a lawsuit, but again, doesn’t anyone ever moderate these suits can go to some of them “this is stupid and a waste of time.”

But yes, I wanted a steak, and decided Steak and Shake would be the place and suing them for not having steak. It is false advertisement, and they must pay!

I am a hypocrite for saying so, but some moron needs to sue a candy company to quit having them call “white chocolate”, chocolate. It isn’t chocolate at all or even a bastardized version of it. The candy companies have lied and they need to pay!!

It is funny that this meme showed up in my feed an hour after seeing your thread. :lol:

https://www.facebook.com/AnimalMemesss/photos/a.1746083572300770/3483677238541386

The link cut off the caption with it because of the box saying to log in or sign up, grrr. "Most buffalo do not actually have wings."

MOST law firms won't even touch what appears to be a frivilous suit. It's a tough tough thing to find a law firm that will even take a medical practice type case that a person thinks they have...TRUTH.

Use some common sense if a person has any....