Of Booze, Broth & Anguish

"Law is not a science, but is essentially empirical," said Mr. Justice Holmes. Law also deals with everything under the sun--in the highest courts as well as the lowest:

> The Florida Supreme Court ruled that a price may be put on human anguish over a dog's death. In West Hollywood, a privately employed garbage man laughingly hurled an empty can at Phyllis La Forte's pet dachshund, Heidi. When the blow killed the dog, Plaintiff La Forte's "marked hysteria" won her a $3,000 jury verdict against the garbage company. An appellate court reversed the verdict, hewing to the general rule that a dog owner may collect only his pet's market value. The state Supreme Court disagreed and set a new precedent: "We feel that the affection of a master for his dog is a very real thing, and that the malicious destruction of the pet provides an element of damage for which the owner should recover, irrespective of the value of the animal."

> The New York Supreme Court's appellate division reversed a $4,604 workmen's compensation award to Business Executive Guy F. Hancock, who was badly injured in a plunge from a hotel balcony while on a business trip to Chicago. Reason: Hancock fell in the act of tossing "hats and coats over the balcony railing," apparently after too many drinks. Said the court: "The frequenting of cocktail lounges with unknown female companions cannot be considered part of employment under the guise that this is accepted business activity."

> The Massachusetts Supreme Court struck a blow to "save our world-renowned fish chowder from degenerating into an insipid broth." As all seasoned slurpers should know, New England fish chowder is full of dangerous objects--from bones to bits of shell. And when Priscilla Webster swallowed without seining at Boston's Blue Ship Tea Room, she got a bone in her throat that required hospital extraction. Miss Webster sued, won a jury verdict of $1,800. On reversing it, the Supreme Court absolved the restaurant of responsibility for the damage done by "the bone of contention," even though "we sympathize with the plaintiff, who suffered a peculiarly New England injury." The court's reasoning: to force all restaurants to grind up chowder chunks would destroy "a hallowed tradition." Said the court: New Englanders "should be prepared to cope with the hazards of fish bones."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.