Yesterday we had a basketball player sue a referee for making a bad call. Today we have yet another unhappy camper using the courts to get his way…

Philly.com – Feb. 21, 2007:

A THREE-SENTENCE restaurant review has led to a high-steaks lawsuit from Chops Restaurant (401 City Ave.) against Inqwaster food critic Craig LaBan and Philadelphia Media Holdings, which owns the Inqwaster and Daily News.

In his “Or Try These” sidebar to his Feb. 4 review of Fleming’s in Radnor, LaBan called Chops, a popular Bala Cynwyd steakhouse, the “Palm on City Line,” where he had a “miserably tough and fatty strip steak.”

Plotkin, who prides himself on Chops’ chops, says in the suit that he had called LaBan about the review and that LaBan had “apologized for the ‘confusion,’ admitted he did not have a strip steak and ‘saw [Plotkin’s] point,’ but would not publish a retraction in his column.”



  1. ChrisMac says:

    Moo!

  2. Professor Johnnycakes says:

    How (sic) is that?

  3. GregA says:

    Ha Ha, something topical for me to talk about!

    Recently one of my competitors who’s retail store recently went out of business, and also runs the small town paper, did a hit piece on me. I contemplated taking action against him for libel. I ended up deciding that my time would be better spent doing what I am good at, and wrote him a LTE basically saying, “I’m sorry you feel that way”. He never ran the letter.

    Now the f’er wants me to buy his building and inventory! Ha!

    People in the town came up to me , while in my store shopping, apologising for the stupid ass article in the paper, and said it hurt the papers credibility. It might be different in a city like Philadelphia. But the restaurant owner has already made his point, and gotten the free (well except for the lawyer fees) publicity.

    Vista FUDsters take note, because I am already seeing the same effect happen to you. That is, the Vista FUD’o’sphere is losing massive amounts of credibility now that people are starting to use Vista.

    In journalism the only asset you have is credibility. I expect this paper will purchase a new restaurant review editor shortly. Regardless of the outcome of this lawsuit.

  4. TJGeezer says:

    Hi steaks indeed.

  5. George says:

    Goodbye LaBan!!

  6. natefrog says:

    Fat and docile, big and dumb
    They look so stupid, they aren’t much fun
    Cows aren’t fun

    Imaginary bonus points if you know where that’s from. . .

  7. Steve S says:

    i keep on telling you folks, kill 80% of the U.S. lawyers and this BS would stop overnight.

  8. Mr. Fusion says:

    I understand. The owner works hard building a reputation for good food. A reviewer carelessly smears that in one fell swoop. The reviewer refuses to correct the error.

    What other recourse does the owner have?

    I don’t see this as frivolous. The newspaper erred and refuses to fix their problem. A frivolous suit would be if the reviewer sued because the steak was tough.

  9. Mike says:

    It seems that the reviewer is the idiot in this case. He admits he made a mistake but won’t fix his review. What other recourse does the restaurant owner have? If the reviewer wrote a bad review about something he did eat, then yes, this is a silly lawsuit.

  10. 2xbob says:

    #6: Cows With Guns. Do I win?

  11. TJGeezer says:

    #16 – Dang, I got here too late. One of Dana Lyons’ better efforts.

    They eat to grow, grow to die,
    Die to be et at the hamburger fry.
    Cows well done

    Nobody thunk it, nobody knew,
    Noone imagined the great cow guru
    Cows Are One

  12. natefrog says:

    Ding, ding, ding! 1000 imaginary points for #10! In the words of Drew Carry, “…the points don’t matter. That’s right, the points are just like the plot line of a porno film. They just don’t matter.”


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 6832 access attempts in the last 7 days.