No wonder many people think frivolous lawsuits are rampant.



Check out this story, sent to me by a local woman who writes a consumer advocate newsletter. She includes the account in her latest edition, under the words "This is true," to assure those who might wonder.



Merv Grazinski of Oklahoma City bought a new Winnebago motor home, the newsletter says. While driving it home on the freeway, he set the cruise control at 70 and went into the back to make coffee.



"Not surprisingly," the newsletter says, "the RV left the freeway, crashed and overturned. Mr. Grazinski sued Winnebago for not advising him in the owner's manual that he couldn't actually do this. The jury awarded him $1,750,000 plus a new motor home," and the company rewrote the manual "in case there were any other complete morons buying their recreational vehicles."



Feeling outraged? Unsure if you are more angry at the "driver," his lawyer, the jury, the judge or the entire legal system? Feeling sorry for the mistreated Winnebago company and ready to demand "tort reform?"



If so, you've been had, just like that consumer advocate and millions of people who fall for that story and others like it.



No such Winnebago lawsuit ever happened. It's an urban legend. Yet that and many similarly outrageous and entertaining but fictional accounts of civil courts gone mad often appear together, in e-mail chain letters and such, presented as truth.



Those hyping the destructive myth that we are plagued by off-the-wall lawsuits have to love it that people are so gullible.



There are some real-life frivolous lawsuits, of course. And I suspect we hear about most, because they are such a treasure for reporters and columnists, not to mention business lobbyists.



But when you read about real ones, note how often they come from other states. That's because absurd suits are scarce but so valued for their amusement and outrage value that they are mined everywhere and printed far and wide.



There is, for instance, the Cleveland guy who sued claiming he became ill and bumped his head after watching something really gross on TV's "Fear Factor." But heck, even that one is probably worth the cost for the fun conversations it inspires. I wonder if the show's publicists hired a shill to file it.



That suit will go down in flames, I'm sure, because that's generally what frivolous lawsuits do.



But how about bogus defenses? Did you follow the accounts this week of the mother's lawsuit in St. Petersburg, filed after her 5-year-old daughter had three fingers chewed off by a sloppily maintained Dillard's department store escalator?



The big retailer had broken all kinds of inspection requirements. It even formed a fake escalator service company -- with no employees -- to give the false impression it was doing required inspections.



That saved the company many dollars, and the escalator had already grabbed and shredded more than a dozen people's shoes before the day it caught that little girl's shoe and, when she tried to free it, mangled her hand.



So in court, Dillard's lawyers blamed the mom, who had also been tending her two other children. Her negligence caused the accident, Dillard's claimed.



The jury found much more fault with Dillard's, which is now on the hook for $15 million.



The absurdity is that a company with $7.8 billion in annual revenues went to court with such a frivolous defense.







Tom Lyons may be contacted at 957-5367 or tom.lyons@ heraldtribune.com.