Wile E. Coyote seeks damages

                        COYOTE V. ACME

In The United States District Court, Southwestern District, Tempe, Arizona
         Case No. B19293, Judge Homer Simpson, Presiding

                   Wile E. Coyote, Plaintiff
                             -vs.-
                   Acme Company, Defendant

Opening statement of Mr. Harold Schoff, attorney for Mr. Coyote:

     My client, Mr. Wile E. Coyote, a resident of Arizona and
contiguous states, does hearby bring suit for damages against
the Acme Company, manufacturer and retail distributor of
assorted merchandise, incorporated in Delaware and doing
business in every state, district, and territory.  Mr. Coyote
seeks compensation for personal injuries, loss of business
income, and mental suffering caused as a direct result of the
actions and/or gross negligence of said company, under  Title 15
of the United States Code, Chapter 47, section 2072, subsection
 (a), relating to product liability.
     
     Mr. Coyote states that on eighty-five separate occasions he
has purchased of the Acme Company (hereinafter, "Defendant"),
through that company`s mail-order department, certain products
which did cause him bodily injury due to defects in manufacture
or improper cautionary labelling. Sales slips made out to Mr. Coyote
as proof of purchase are at present in the possession of the Court,
marked Exhibit A.  Such injuries sustained by Mr. Coyote have
temporarily restricted his ability to make a living in his profession
of predator.  Mr. Coyote is self-employed and thus not eligible 
for Workmen`s Compensation.  

      Mr. Coyote states that on December 13th he received
of Defendant via parcel post one Acme Rocket Sled.  The
intention of Mr. Coyote was to use the Rocket sled to aid
him in pursuit of his prey.  Upon receipt of  the Rocket Sled
Mr. Coyote removed it from its wooden shipping crate and
sighting his prey in the distance, activated the ignition.  As
Mr. Coyote gripped the handlebars, the Rocket Sled accelerated 
with such sudden and precipitate force as to stretch Mr. Coyote`s
forelimbs to a length of fifty feet.  Subsequently, the rest of Mr.
Coyote`s body shot forward with a violent jolt, causing severe
strain to his back and neck and placing him unexpectedly
astride the Rocket Sled.  Disappearing over the horizon at such 
speed as to leave a diminishing jet trail along its path, the Rocket 
Sled soon brought Mr. Coyote abreast of his prey.  At that moment
the animal he was pursuing veered sharply to the right.  Mr. Coyote
vigorously attempted to follow this maneuver but was unable to, due
to poorly designed sttering on the Rocket Sled and a faulty or 
nonexistent braking system.  Shortly thereafter, the unchecked 
progress of the Rocket Sled brought it and Mr. Coyote into
collision with the side of a mesa.

      Paragraph One of the Report of Attending Physician
(Exhibit B),  prepared by Dr. Ernest Grosscup, M.D., D.O.,
details the multiple fractures, contusions, and tissue damage
suffered by Mr. Coyote as a result of this collision.  Repair of 
the injuries required a full bandage around the head (excluding
the ears), a neck brace, and full or partial casts on all four legs.

      Hampered by these injuries, Mr. Coyote was nevertheless
obliged to support himself.  With this in mind, he purchased of
Defendant as an aid to mobility one pair of Acme Rocket Skates.
When he attempted to use this product, however, he became 
involved in an accident remarkably similar to that which occured
with the Rocket Sled.  Again, Defendant sold over the counter, 
without caveat, a product which attached powerful jet engines
(in this case, two) to inadequate vehicles, with little or no provision
for passenger safety.  Encumbered by his heavy casts, Mr. 
Coyote lost control of the Rocket Skates soon after strapping
them on, and collided with a roadside billboard so violently as to
leave a hole in the shape of his full silhouette.
      
      Mr. Coyote states that on occasions too numerous to
list in this document he has suffered mishaps with explosives
purchased of Defendant: the Acme "Little Giant" Firecracker, 
the Acme Self-Guided Aerial Bomb, etc. (For a full listing, see
the Acme Mail Order Explosives Catalogue and attached 
deposition, entered in evidence as Exhibit C.)  Indeed, it is 
safe to say that not once has an explosive purchased of
Defendant by Mr. Coyote performed in an expected manner. 
To cite just one example: At the expense of much time and 
personal effort, Mr. Coyote constructed around the outer rim
of a butte a wooden trough beginning at the top of the butte
and spiralling downward around it to some few feet above a
black X painted on the desert floor.  The trough was designed
in such a way that a spherical explosive of the type sold by
Defendant would roll easily and swiftly down to the point of
detonation indicated by the X.  Mr. Coyote placed a generous
pile of birdseed directly on the X, and then, carrying the
spherical Acme Bomb (Catalogue #78-832), climbed to the
top of the butte.  Mr. Coyote`s prey, seeing the birdseed,
approached, and Mr. Coyote proceeded to light the fuse.
In an instant, the fuse burned down to the stem, causing the
bomb to detonate.
      
	In addition to reducing all Mr. Coyote`s careful
preparations to naught, the premature detonation of Defendant`s
product resulted in the following disfigurements to Mr. Coyote:
 
 1.  Severe singeing of the hair on the head, neck, and muzzle.
  2.  Sooty discoloration.
  3.  Fracture of the left ear at the stem, causing the ear to
      dangle in the aftershock with a creaking noise.
  4.  Full or partial combustion of whiskers, producing kinking,
       frazzling, and ashy disintegration.
  5.  Radical widening of the eyes, due to brow and lid charring.

      We come now to the Acme Spring-Powered Shoes.  The
remains of a pair of these purchased by Mr. Coyote on June 23rd
are Plaintiff`s Exhibit D. Selected fragments have been shipped to
the metallurgical laboratories of the University of California at
Santa Barbara for analysis, but to date, no explanation has been
found for this product`s sudden and extreme malfunction.
 
As advertised by Defendant, this product is simplicity itself: two 
wood-and-metal sandals, each attached to milled-steel springs
of high tensile strength and compressed in a tightly coiled position
by a cocking device with a lanyard release.  Mr. Coyote believed
that this product would enable him to pounce upon his prey in the
initial moments of the chase, when swift reflexes are at a premium.
     
      To increase the shoes' thrusting power still further, Mr. Coyote
affixed them by their bottoms to the side of a large boulder.  Adjacent
to the boulder was a path which Mr. Coyote`s prey was known to
frequent.  Mr. Coyote put his hind feet in the wood-and-metal sandals
and crouched in readiness, his right forepaw holding firmly to the
lanyard release.  Within a short time Mr. Coyote`s prey did indeed
appear on the path coming toward him. Unsuspecting, the prey 
stopped near Mr. Coyote, well within range of the springs at full
extension.  Mr. Coyote gauged the distance with
care and proceeded to pull the lanyard release.

      At this point, Defendant`s product should have thrust Mr. Coyote 
forward and away from the boulder.  Instead, for reasons yet unknown,
the Acme Spring-Powered Shoes thrust the boulder away from Mr.
Coyote. As the intended prey looked on unharmed, Mr. Coyote hung
suspended in air. Then the twin springs recoiled, bringing Mr. Coyote
to a violent feet-first collision with the boulder, the full weight of his
head and forequarters falling upon his lower extremities.

      The force of this impact then caused the springs to rebound,
whereupon Mr. Coyote was thrust skyward.  A second recoil and
collision followed.  The boulder, meanwhile, which was roughly ovoid
in shape, had begun to bounce down a hillside, the coiling and
recoiling of the springs adding to its velocity.  At each bounce, Mr.
Coyote cam into contact with the boulder, or the boulder cam into
contact with Mr. Coyote, or both came into contact with the ground.
As the grade was a long one, this process continued for some time.

      The sequence of collisions resulted in systemic physical damage
to Mr. Coyote, vix., flattening of the cranium, sideways displacement of
the tongue, reduction of length of legs and upper body, and compression
of vertebrae from base of tail to head.  Repetion of blows along a vertical
axis produced a series of regular horizontal folds in Mr. Coyote`s body
tissues--a rare and painful condition which caused Mr. Coyote to expand
upward and contract downward alternately as he walked, and to emit an
off-key, accordionlike wheezing with every step.  The distracting and
embarrassing nature of this symptom has been a major impediment to
Mr. Coyote`s pursuit of a normal social life.

      As the court is no doubt aware, Defendant has a virtual monopoly
of manufacture and sale of goods required by Mr. Coyote's work.  It is
our contention that Defendant has used its market advantage to the
detriment of the consumer of such specialized products as itching
powder, giant kites, Burmese tiger traps, anvils, and two-hundred-foot-long
rubber bands.  Much as he has come to mistrust Defendant's products,
Mr. Coyote has no other domestic source of supply to which to turn.
One can only wonder what our trading partners in Western Europe
and Japan would make of such a situation, where a giant company
is allowed to victimize the consumer in the most reckless and wrongful
manner over and over again.

      Mr. Coyote respectfully requests that the Court regard these
larger economic implications and assess punitive damages in the
amount of seventeen million dollars.  In addition, Mr. Coyote seeks
actual damages (missed meals, medical expenses, days lost from
professional occupation) of one million dollars; general damages
(mental suffering, injury to reputation) of twenty million dollars; and
attorney's fees of seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars.  By
awarding Mr. Coyote the full amount, this Court will censure
Defendant, its directors, officers, shareholders, successors, and
assigns, in the only language they understand, and reaffirm the
right of the individual predator to equal protection under the law.


-----------------Thanks to a fwd from JodiStew@aol.com