Off the Scales*: Does this real news story need a punchline?

From The Star-Ledger, January 31, 2009, p. 18 (no byline):
 

Court issues mixed ruling on mail-order lawsuit

A state appeals court yesterday upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit filed by a Bergen County man who claimed a mail-order product he purchased promising penis enlargement violates the state’s Consumer Fraud Act.

The three appellate judges agreed with a trial court judge who dismissed the lawsuit, ruling that the man, Englewood attorney [name redacted], failed to prove he suffered any “ascertainable loss.”

But the appeals court said the trial court erred in dismissing the suit without allowing [attorney/plaintiff surname] to offer such proof in an amended filing.

[Attorney/plaintiff surname] filed the lawsuit, for which he sought class-action status, in November 2007, six days after ordering the product, Herculex, from the mail-order health food supplier, Hampshire Labs Inc. The appeals court decision noted [attorney/plaintiff surname] apparently filed his lawsuit based on the ingredients of the topical ointment with no indication that he ever tried the product.

[Attorney/plaintiff surname] said he intends to file an amended lawsuit.

[end of story]

##

Do we need a punchline?

A Google search does not show the attorney ever filed an amended complaint.

##

* “Off the Scales” is an occasional series, usually with entries appearing as “sidebar” features within larger entries on other topics, which I first announced within this entry, as Off the Scales: A comment series on excesses in the U.S. legal profession. This occasional series is not meant to imply that I am an attorney, which I am not; it is meant in part for entertainment and is dedicated to the proposition that “I don’t claim that any jackass can practice law, but that there are some things done within the legal-professional realm that even a jackass like me can do for himself, in pro se fashion.”