Deli Meat Contained Human Flesh, Man Claims
MORRISTOWN, N.J.  A deli worker at Kings Supermarkets gave an unwitting customer a piece of human flesh with her bologna, causing her husband to “vomit like crazy” when he found the unwanted slice of meat, the Zalla family claims in a recent filing in  New Jersey Superior Court.
While preparing Markeljana Zalla’s order, a female deli worker cut herself at the meat slicer and stopped working to seek medical attention. A male co-worker took her place, the lawsuit claims, but instead of cleaning up the bloody slicer, he simply finished the order and handed it to Zalla.
The next day, while making bologna sandwiches for his children, Armando Zalla “noticed a piece of foreign matter which was obviously a segment of human flesh, which had been discovered between slices of luncheon meat,” the complaint states.
He says his daughter “suffered extreme revulsion upon seeing the flesh fragment and ran away from the scene of the discovery.”
Meanwhile, Armando says he ran to the bathroom and “vomited like crazy.” A fine lawsuit is pending.

Suit Over Porn Actress’s Name  Gets Dismissed
A Houston woman who alleged an actress in a porn film stole her name admitted she has no “ownership interest” in the name Syvette Wimberly, dooming her hopes of winning an unusual privacy case.
 Lara Madden, a former high-school friend of the real Syvette Wimberly, used the name for her appearance in the Vivid Entertainment film Desperate. Wimberly sued both Madden and Vivid in June 2007, alleging invasion of privacy by misappropriation and negligence.
For Wimberly to win, she had to show that Madden took her name for the value associated with it.
But  Wimberly said she didn’t know if her name had any value before Madden used it. That led to the following exchange with Vivid attorney Geoffrey A. Berg:
“Well, you haven’t copyrighted it, have you?”
“No.”
“You don’t claim any special ownership interest in it other than it is your name?”
“Look, I don’t know if I own the rights to my name, but I do know that I’ve  been harmed in this situation and I have dealtwith stress in this situation —”
Wimberly has married and now goes by Syvette Keathley. But she said the name Syvette is so unique that she would have sued if Madden had chosen the name Syvette Smith.
Vivid claimed. that “uniqueness alone does not bestow a proprietary interest in Wimberly’s name,” and that there is no precedent in Texas for attributing “value” to a noncelebrity’s name. Vivid also said that the negligence claim should be dismissed because it owed Wimberly no duty to ask Madden if the name Syvette Wimberly belonged to anyone she knew.
Wimberly testified that nobody had confused her with the X-rated “Syvette Wimberly”. When Berg asked her, “Nobody would think that you would do adult films, right?” she replied, “Right.”
At that point, attorneys for Madden  moved for summary judgment or to dismiss the case, arguing that “(Wimberly’s) name clearly has no value under the law.”


Man Says His Therapist Stalked, Sodomized Him
NEWTON, N.J.  A married man claims his licensed professional counselor, a woman, got him liquored up, dressed him up as a woman in a wig and lipstick and sodomized him, then stalked him even after he demanded that she leave him alone.
The man claims defendant Dawn C. Stillwagon-Ahlers, of Newton, abused  and harassed him while he was her patient and in fragile condition. He says he hired her to perform “cognitive behavior therapy” to treat his panic attacks. Much to his surprise, he says, shortly after he became her patient  she “began to, among  other things, sexually harass, sexually assault, batter and stalk plaintiff.”
He says the harassment and stalking continued after he stopped seeing her. He also says she gave him alcohol though she knew he was taking anti-depressants and has diabetes.
He says that in April Stillwagon-Ahlers surrendered her license for two years, after the state Board of marriage and Family Therapy Examiners brought her up on charges of misconduct related his case.
He demands punitive damages. No surprise there.

Drinking Liberally Sues Blue State Coffee
MANHATTAN . Oh, those liberals. Living Liberally dba Drinking Liberally accuses Blue State Coffee of infringing trademark by using a “Drink Liberally” slogan, which is confusingly similar to “Drinking Liberally.” In its federal complaint, Living Liberally says it is “dedicated to creating communities around progressive politics.” “Defendant Blue State Coffee LLC is not only using Drink Liberally, which is virtually identical to Living Liberally’s Drinking Liberally trademark, service mark and trade name, for virtually identical goods and services, but also have done so after initially drafting and negotiating with Living Liberally a license to use such mark and then declining to enter the license, and expressly misrepresenting that they were ‘moving away from’ any use of their infringing mark. Clearly, this constitutes deliberate trademark infringement and bad faith, and must be stopped immediately,” Drinking Liberally claims.