Filmdrunk (or as I like to call it, the website that I like to channel when I make jokes that get me punched in the face) is reporting that the Canadian Supreme Court has affirmed judgment for a plaintiff who was injured when a golfer tried to — drunkenly during a bachelor party –recreate the Happy Gilmore golf swing.
More important than the law is Filmdrunk’s description of the Plaintiff, identified as “a Woodsman”:
A woodsman? That’s a job? I thought that was what you call someone too drunk to get a job. It’s still unknown whether the case will have legal implications in the U.S., but it’s going to set Canadian stereotypes back 30 years. This is like a Mexican suing because he could no longer sleep under a giant sombrero and got laid off from the chihuahua farm.
I’m actually surprised that the Court brought up the fact that the Plaintiff was intoxicated. Its a Canadian Bachelor Party Golf Outing. The only way you could theoretically be more drunk is if you found that little tunnel in being John Malkovich and you ended up in the body of Danny Devito.
(Not John Malkovich)
