This legal beef about steak starts to rub a raw nerve

Web-posted: Friday, February 7, 1997

f you've wearied of O.J. but still have a craving for justice, let us return to the case of David Schlessinger, fussy eater and overgrown brat.

As some may recall, Schlessinger, 31, who runs a North Side insurance agency that his father created, went with a couple of pals to vacation at Lake Geneva.

He said he needed the vacation because he has high blood pressure, for which he takes medication, and was in need of relaxation.

But he and his friends went to a restaurant, Anthony's Steakhouse, for dinner, where Schlessinger ordered his steak medium-well.

The steak came, but Schlessinger thought it was well-done rather than only medium-well. Schlessinger demanded that it be replaced, but the owner said it was done the way he had ordered it.

So Schlessinger had a tantrum. He declined to eat the steak and said he would not pay for the meal unless he was given his way.

As George Condos, the owner, described the scene: "He was running up and down the main dining room with his cellular phone and complains to the waitress about the table, the salads, the meal, everything. She offered to give him something else. He said our food was garbage.

"He acted like an immature punk, threatening my father and saying he was going to take our restaurant... . He smarted off to the customers. He went up to a local business owner and told him he probably didn't know what a cellular phone was.''

Schlessinger was so angry about his steak and what he thought was a lack of respect by just about everyone in the joint that he called the police.

The town's cops came and told him that it would be best if he ate his food, paid his bill, shut up and left. Or maybe just shut up, pay and leave.

That wounded his feelings even more. And, he says, it caused his blood pressure to rise.

So being a true creature of the 1990s, he hired a lawyer and started suing.

He went to federal court and sued the owner of the restaurant. He sued the cops involved in the incident. He sued the town of Lake Geneva. He sued the Town Board and its members, the town's police department, and the town's chief of police.

But the court wasn't impressed. It thought that Schlessinger was kind of a goof and said so when it tossed his complaint out.

So he appealed. And it wound up being pondered by a federal appeals court.

It found that his suit was frivolous and that he was "goofy'' and a "wise guy.''

As the appellate panel's opinion put it: "Schlessinger's suit is absurd and likely malicious. It trivializes the constitutional rights he asks us to vindicate. If your meal is not tasty, you do not throw a tantrum, upset the other diners and then sue the mayor of the town where the restaurant is located.''

And the court did something that judges don't do often enough. It decided to punish Schlessinger and his lawyer for being frivolous, malicious pains in the neck.

"We therefore direct Schlessinger and his attorney to show cause ... why they should not be penalized ... for pursuing a frivolous appeal.''

Schlessinger is a sensitive guy, and his feelings were again hurt. So he called me for sympathy and publicity, saying: "How dare a judge call me goofy and a wise guy because I called the police? I am president of a company.''

Now, the appellate court has ruled again. It has ordered Schlessinger and his lawyer, Andrew J. Shaw, to pay the legal bills of some of the people they sued.

They were told to pay the cops $8,320.80. The restaurant got $2,951.75. And the town and the Town Board were awarded $4,810.19.

That comes to $16,082.74.

But Schlessinger is not a quitter. He says he is going to appeal the whole thing to the U.S. Supreme Court.

He's very upset. "The Chicago Bar Association is doing a writeup in its journal on the legalities of the ruling because the judge made a bad ruling. The papers on the legalities have been sent to the top 50 lawyers in the country.''

And he said that he also is thinking of suing me because he doesn't think I treated him kindly in my column. He says he suspects that the federal appeals judges ruled against him because of my column. I find that flattering but a bit bubble-headed.

Well, I don't want to get into a public dispute with this lad. But I should warn him that I, too, have a blood pressure problem. And I would bet that my blood pressure rises even higher than his when I am provoked.

And when someone threatens to sue me for printing what he said and what judges said about him, my blood pressure bounces off the top of the meter.

So he should watch out, or I might sue him for making my temples throb. And for not having the sense and good taste to order his steak medium or medium-well.

Or maybe just a bowl of pablum.

© 1996 Chicago Tribune