Man Sues Tuna Fish for Having Bones


We'll never forget the first time someone served us a piece of chicken with a bone in it. We were horrified. "What is this shit?" we spat. "A bone? This is America! Chicken isn't supposed to have bones! It's supposed to be pounded and mixed with modified corn starch, various emulsifiers, and delicious tertiary butylhydroquinone!" Now we know what we should have done: sued. We should have sued the people who gave us the chicken, the store they bought it from, the company that packaged it, and the infernal chickens themselves. That's what retired NYPD lieutenant Robert McKenna is doing after he came across a bone in a tuna sandwich his wife made for him one afternoon at home in Staten Island. McKenna is suing Bumble Bee tuna and Costco for $100,000, because not only did they ruin that sandwich ("It was a great sandwich," McKenna reminisced to the Daily News, on a kaiser roll with lettuce and tomato), but because they ruined tuna for him forever:

"I can't even be near tuna now," he said. "Like a fish fillet sandwich? Forget it."

We feel you, Robert. Someone's got to pay. This isn't just about your quality of life, it's a much bigger issue. Tuna shouldn't have bones. It just ain't natural.

Ex-cop suing Bumble Bee and Costco over bone in tuna can [NYDN]