Comments on: Suit: lily-seller should have warned of toxicity to cats

By: NickM

NickM — Mon, 02 Sep 2013 00:25:27 +0000

You say toxic to felines as if it’s a bad thing.

I’m kidding; of course it is. It might make a dog sick when he eats the cat.

By: Mandy

Mandy — Fri, 30 Aug 2013 18:10:07 +0000

"For Boogaloo!" #WeAreAllBoogaloo

By: Mandy

Mandy — Fri, 30 Aug 2013 18:09:08 +0000

Boogaloo the cat should sue his owners for leaving the lilies out where his could get them.

Talk about negligence and failure of duty to care!

Will no-one think of the cats??!!

I’m going to go start a Change-dot-org petition demanding that Holder’s justice department take action against the Gees.

By: peter

peter — Fri, 30 Aug 2013 15:29:40 +0000

“Reading the article in the Oregonian, and it all makes sense: The cat owner, Mr. Gee, is a lawyer”

Yep. Suddenly I understand.

By: peter

peter — Fri, 30 Aug 2013 15:26:54 +0000

@Jason Barney.

upvote for best comment.

By: Cat Owner Sues Florist. | Raised On Hoecakes

Cat Owner Sues Florist. | Raised On Hoecakes — Fri, 30 Aug 2013 09:19:05 +0000

[…] friend Walter Olsen over at Overlawyered.com has an interesting tale of a cat owner suing a florist over vet bills the owner incurred when his cat ate some lilies which […]

By: Mandy

Mandy — Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:26:22 +0000

Lilies are toxic for dogs as well. So are daffodils. And onions. And xylitol (the sweetener in sugar-free gum).

How far do we want this warning label thing to go?

By: wfjag

wfjag — Thu, 29 Aug 2013 15:07:07 +0000

Reading the article in the Oregonian, and it all makes sense:

The cat owner, Mr. Gee, is a lawyer, and is representing the cat and himself in the suit; and
He purchased the lilies in February for his wife; and, they left the flowers where the cat could get to them.

Accordingly, the Flower Shop should join Mr. Gee and Mrs. Gee (and, also send her a Valentine’s Day reminder card as a valued customer since Mr. Gee has purchased her flowers in February in the past) as 3d Party Defendants, because the flowers came with a warning that they are toxic to humans (who can read), which alerted them to the fact that they could be toxic to cats (triggering a duty of inquiry), but, in gross dereliction of their duties as owners and haste to do whatever they were doing after he presented her with flowers (Que sound track of “Lawyers In Love”), they negligently and recklessly left the flowers in a dangerous place were a curious animal, such a cat, had access to and could eat the toxic leaves, so that the Flower Shop is entitled to indemnity, including reasonable attorneys fees and costs, in addition to the lost business and damage to reputation due to the adverse publicity of the suit (Then we’ll see if Mr. Gee knows of Mr. Lincoln’s advice as to attorney’s who represent themselves).

Query: Does anyone know if Honest Abe ever opined on lawyers who represent their cats? Or spouses?

By: wfjag

wfjag — Thu, 29 Aug 2013 14:34:14 +0000

@captnhal
The video means nothing. Those are trained professionals with years of experience doing stunts. Don’t let your cat try that at home.

By: marco73

marco73 — Thu, 29 Aug 2013 12:02:56 +0000

Why only protect cats from flowers?
Chocolate, though delicious to humans, is toxic for dogs. I don’t recall seeing any “don’t feed to dogs” warnings on my Hershey bar.

Cats are notorious for digging up plants; any gardener with cats knows not to grow whole varieties of plants that are toxic to cats.
Maybe they should put a warning label on the cat?