Star Wars Day Special: Waitress promised Toyota, gets Toy Yoda, sues

In honor of yesterday being Star Wars Day, we present this hilarious but true story from a while back. This woman would have a good case unless the company represented IN PRINT that the winner would get a “Toy Yoda.” Apparently, they didn’t, and even implied (see below) that that the Big Prize was indeed a vehicle. Ergo, the suit was settled for an undisclosed amount/car. The manager said it was an April Fools joke, but I think he bit off more than he could chew.

She looks pissed off!

This took place in the early Oughts, judging from this entry on the University of Las Vegas Law Site.

My only question is this: if Ms. Berry was working at Gulf Coast Wings, why on earth would they identify her as a “Former Hooters waitress” in both places?

 

27 Comments

  1. Randall Schenck
    Posted May 5, 2019 at 2:56 pm | Permalink

    Maybe Gulf Coast Wings was the parent company of the Hooters? Glad to see this outcome – smart ass jokers…

    • Randall Schenck
      Posted May 5, 2019 at 3:38 pm | Permalink

      Lots of times franchises are owned by companies and not individuals as we tend to think. (the franchisee)

      The company I worked for – Army & Air Force Exchange Service was the 4th largest franchisee for Burger King at one time. Who would guess.

  2. JezGrove
    Posted May 5, 2019 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

    Berry quit her job (understandably) and then sued Gulf Coast Wings, which owned the local Hooters franchise. https://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/05/09/toy-yoda.htm

    I found the details by following the citation given in the Hooters article on the much-maligned Wikipedia, for what it’s worth.

  3. Posted May 5, 2019 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

    As some say, those who screw their personnel eventually have to wash the floors themselves.

    • gravelinspector-Aidan
      Posted May 6, 2019 at 6:46 am | Permalink

      those who screw their personnel eventually have to

      … sub-contract premises hygiene to some other company, and let them do the screwing of the staff.
      There is always another sucker willing to come along and figure they can make 5% off that cleaning contract, by finding someone desperate enough for money to do the work for a lower rate. At least, without a social safety net and without a health system, there’s always someone desperate enough. That’s capitalism for you!

      • Posted May 6, 2019 at 12:58 pm | Permalink

        It depends. Some managers I know ended up hiring more personal, of lesser qualification, for higher salaries.
        With the birth rates of today’s Europe, one cannot rely on a queue of desperate people wishing to work for him for peanuts.

        • gravelinspector-Aidan
          Posted May 8, 2019 at 5:06 pm | Permalink

          That’s what immigration is for, in large part.

  4. Matt Foley
    Posted May 5, 2019 at 3:30 pm | Permalink

    Sounds like something Trump would do. Say/do something outrageous then blame the victim for taking him seriously.

    https://news.yahoo.com/trump-jokes-150223195.html

    • JezGrove
      Posted May 5, 2019 at 3:37 pm | Permalink

      Yes, and he’d be over-promoted as a Hooters manager – not sure how he got to run the country.

      • gravelinspector-Aidan
        Posted May 6, 2019 at 6:47 am | Permalink

        He wouldn’t be able to keep his hands off the product.
        If I understand the trans-Pondian slang correctly.

  5. Posted May 5, 2019 at 4:29 pm | Permalink

    Typical, I imagine, of the demeaning and degrading treatment that women can expect from Hooters. The manager should be fired and Jodee Berry compensated.

    • Randall Schenck
      Posted May 5, 2019 at 4:48 pm | Permalink

      There is a Twin Peaks just a short distance from my place here in Wichita. I have lived here more than two years and never been in the place. What that tells you about me is old and married.

      • Posted May 5, 2019 at 5:00 pm | Permalink

        And not too curious. 😀

        • Randall Schenck
          Posted May 5, 2019 at 5:04 pm | Permalink

          No, leave that trait to my cats.

      • gravelinspector-Aidan
        Posted May 6, 2019 at 6:48 am | Permalink

        There is a restaurant chain dedicated to a 1980s/90s cult TV series? Log Lady and all that.
        I am so glad that was a period that I didn’t have a TV.

        • Posted May 6, 2019 at 7:41 am | Permalink

          Yeah, I was intrigued too, so I googled Twin Peaks restaurant and got to its Wikipedia page. The first sentence is:

          Twin Peaks is an American chain of sports bars and restaurants based in Dallas, Texas and has been described as a breastaurant along with similar chains.

          I did not bother to read the second or any subsequent sentences.

          • gravelinspector-Aidan
            Posted May 6, 2019 at 11:07 am | Permalink

            So, just the place for a first date with Ms Millie Tant leader of the Wimmin’s Party then?

        • infiniteimprobabilit
          Posted May 6, 2019 at 8:41 am | Permalink

          As I recall, Twin Peaks (the TV series) was quite original and certainly worth watching, though (since I missed some episodes) it was sometimes hard to follow what was going on. Of course the fact that it was a mystery serial didn’t help me to catch up.

          The owls are not what they seem.

          cr

          • gravelinspector-Aidan
            Posted May 6, 2019 at 11:08 am | Permalink

            It wasn’t enough to encourage me to get a telly.

          • Posted May 6, 2019 at 12:59 pm | Permalink

            The ending was not happy.

  6. infiniteimprobabilit
    Posted May 5, 2019 at 8:09 pm | Permalink

    Generally I side with the defendants in this cases and ask ‘could the sue-er really have believed this’?

    (Like, say, this one: http://loweringthebar.net/2009/06/reasonable-consumer-would-know-crunchberries-are-not-real-judge-rules.html

    or this
    http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2016/06/time-man-sued-pepsi-harrier-jet/ )

    However, I think the win-a-car in this case was perfectly believable – since there was (ostensibly) just one car to be won amongst all Hooters outlets. And the manager’s actions in leading Berry out to the parking lot and raising her expectations were just cruel, whether malicious or just plain thick. He deserved to lose the case.

    cr

    • infiniteimprobabilit
      Posted May 5, 2019 at 8:11 pm | Permalink

      Also, Yoda intolerably annoying is.

      • Doug
        Posted May 6, 2019 at 8:07 am | Permalink

        Burma Shave once advertised “Free-Free/A trip to Mars/For 900/Empty jars.” As a publicity stunt, a grocery store owner announced he was taking them up on it, asking his customers to let him have the jars. He collected the jars; the company offered him and his wife tickets to a Moers [pronounced “Mars”], a town in Germany, which he accepted.

        • infiniteimprobabilit
          Posted May 6, 2019 at 8:35 am | Permalink

          Nice story, and it sounds as if the store owner and the company entered into the spirit of the thing.

          cr

  7. infiniteimprobabilit
    Posted May 5, 2019 at 8:21 pm | Permalink

    And on the subject of Star Wars court cases, here’s this beauty:

    http://loweringthebar.net/2015/04/flying-car.html

    cr

  8. Tom B
    Posted May 5, 2019 at 9:56 pm | Permalink

    Must be a display of my ignorance as, based on the restaurant name, I would not have identified the plaintiff as a potential employee.

    Squad may fire when ready.

    • gravelinspector-Aidan
      Posted May 6, 2019 at 6:50 am | Permalink

      What are they going to fire? Some of that “McDonalds Special Sauce”?


%d bloggers like this: