A time of family, food, and football, Thanksgiving is all aboutcounting our blessings—none of which should be negligence, murderor harassment. Click through to read about 5 turkey-relatedincidents that ran afoul of court.

Hunting Season

Neil P. Jacobs and James Kent were hunting turkeys in the woodsin New York in 2003; Kent's hunting party had established aposition, which Jacobs entered with his party while looking for anarea in which to hunt. After hearing gobbling noises and seeing aflash of red, Kent shot into the underbrush. Instead of bagging hisfamily's holiday meal, he accidentally hit Jacobs. Jacobs brought a suit against Kent, alleging thedefendant acted negligently and mistakenly shot him, moving forjudgment on the issue of liability.

The plaintiff contended that the sole cause of the accidentalshooting was the defendant's failure to identify his target. Turkeyhunters must be able to see the entire bird and ascertain itsgender before taking a shot. Kent moved to dismiss the complaintbased on primary assumption of risk. The Court found that eventhough hunters assume the risks of hunting for sport, having toassume the risk of negligent behavior on the part of other huntersunreasonably increases that risk. Therefore, Kent's cross motionwas denied. The court also decided it could not determine as amatter of law whether the defendant's actions fell under thedoctrine of primary assumption of risk, so the original motion wasalso denied.

Roadrunner

While driving on a parkway in New York in 2005, a wild turkeyhit Mary Reilly's windshield. The impact shattered the windshield,so Reilly put her signal on and slowed down in preparation to pulloff onto the left-hand shoulder. Alan Watson was driving behind herand noticed something moving in the median of the roadway. When hereturned his gaze to the road, he noticed Reilly's car was slowingdown. He was unable to stop in time and rear-ended her vehicle.Reilly filed Reilly v. Watson, alleging liability on thepart of Watson.

In most rear-end collisions, the motorist in the rear is foundliable, except in cases of mechanical failure, sudden stopping ofthe vehicle ahead, skidding on wet pavement or another unavoidable,reasonable cause. The jury did not find Watson liable because heprovided the court with a non-negligent explanation of theaccident.

Gobble Gobble Choke

Helen Silva was eating a plate of turkey, dressing andvegetables at Woolworth's restaurant in the fall of 1938 when shechoked on a small bone. She was able to eject the bone with thehelp of a bystander. She sued the restaurant for injuries, includingembarrassment and medical fees of $36. Liability for choking isdetermined based on the nature of the object; if it is foreign tothe dish served, there is liability on the part of the dish'sproducer.

In this instance, the turkey bone was found to be natural to aplate of roast turkey, just as fish bones could reasonably andnaturally be found in a plate of fish; the presence of the bonedoes not render the food inconsumable. A consumer of the turkeydish should therefore anticipate the presence of and take care toavoid swallowing bones. The original judgment of $500 to theplaintiff for general damages was reversed.

Deadly Dinner

On Thanksgiving 2009 in Jupiter, Fla., Paul Merhige arriveduninvited to a family celebration. Witnesses reported that he shotand killed four of his relatives, including 6-year-old MakaylaSitton. A lawsuit filed by Makayla's parents, Jim and MurielSitton, charges Michael and Carol Merhige with negligence, allegingthat they knew their unstable son would be attending the party butfailed to keep him from doing so. The plaintiffs' attorney evenwent so far as to suggest that the Merhiges had “some sense” thattheir son might become violent to the point of murder, but chosenot to warn guests or attempt to stop Paul from killing.

Judge Meenu Sasser threw the lawsuit out, stating that theMerhiges could not be held accountable for the actions of theiradult son. He also threw out a similar lawsuit filed by PatrickKnight, husband of a pregnant woman who was one of the fourvictims. Paul Merhige was sentenced to seven consecutive lifesentences after entering a guilty plea in the deaths of four of hisfamily members. The Sittons are seeking an appeal.

A Holiday for All

In 2009, Promila Awasthi filed a lawsuit alleging that her bosses atInfosys's Fremont, Calif., office made fun of her and refused topay her overtime when she worked American holidays such asThanksgiving. They mocked her for supposedly lacking family valuesand being too American despite her Indian heritage. The harassmentdid not end even after Awasthi has resigned.

Awasthi alleges that management called her children “ABCD,”short for “American-Born Confused Desi” and “IBCD,” short for“Indian-Born Confused Desi,” which are both derogatory terms usedto criticize Americanized people of Indian ancestry. She filedseveral causes of action including national origin/ancestry,gender, age, and religious discrimination in violation ofCalifornia's Fair Employment and Housing Act; failure to payovertime and intentional infliction of emotional distress.