Taking that line of analysis to this suit: the sticky nature of the adhesive is generally short lived as the VOCs in them evaporate after application. In my experience, within twenty or thirty minutes adhesives are no longer sticky or gel-like but solid and less sticky. Is the Home Depot to hire someone to check the toilet seats every twenty minutes? What’s reasonable? Did they make those “for your protection” toilet seat covers available? Did the plaintiff use them? Why didn’t he look where he was sitting? Wouldn’t the pranksters apply the adhesive in a manner that would remain undetected until someone suffered from the prank?

Copycat behavior runs both ways—prankster and would-be plaintiff. I’d investigate this claim closely to rule out a set-up.

And, the plaintiff’s argument for Home Depot’s actual notice is lame. Just because Home Depot was aware of a prior similar circumstance does not make them aware of this particular circumstance any more than a slip & fall at any of their other stores makes them liable for subsequent falls elsewhere. I suppose it does serve to put Home Depot on notice to check for glue on toilet seats.

I also cringe at the venue where the suit is filed. It’s not friendly—especially for corporate defendants.