Turkey Dispute Leads to $4.25 Million Award

There has been a huge award in a novel malicious prosecution case over the alleged theft of pet turkeys. In 2004, defendant Ralph Dupps accused Robert and Jennifer Klippel of turkey-napping their pets and then releasing them back into nature. While the charges were dismissed, the Klippels sued and were just awarded $4.25 million


They claim that the ordeal drove Robert Klippel to alcohol and drove Jennifer Klippel to the use of sleep aids and depression medication.

What is fascinating is that this is a lawsuit against the Dupps as opposed to the state.

The turkeys had been a long dispute over their scaring Robert Klippel’s son and defecating in the Klippel yard. A police officer allegedly suggested just shooting the birds. The Klippels admit that they took the turkeys to a wildlife preserve. The Dupps then went to police who issued warrants for petit larceny on the Klippels who spent 10 hours in jail.

The case involved arguments under nuisance and the right of owners to take such actions. The jury obviously agreed.

Source: IslandPacket

128 thoughts on “Turkey Dispute Leads to $4.25 Million Award”

  1. Mespo
    despising is stock in trade for a bigot, so colour me shocked.

    Blouise
    explains the catholic hatred certainly. As for me I would lump orange delusion and bigotry into the same septic container as the catholic version of both. I would hope that they would never call me a Scotsman, that was your call not mine. If Had written klein instead of wee your conclusion would have been to call me German.

    Lottakatz was much closer to who I am.

  2. harebell
    1, August 11, 2010 at 1:23 am

    Blouise
    Scotland is part of Gt Britain. It’s a geographical term. Educating the English on this is tough enough please don’t add to the task.

    ============================================================
    Good morning bluebell,

    I’m sorry you are having so much trouble educating your Englishmen … what’s that old quote … I can’t recall who said it but it goes something like “He may be British but he’ll never be an Englishman.”

    According to my ancestors, darlin’, Scotland’s being part of Great Britain was a real tragedy for the Scots … but then they were all from the Highlands … as far as they were concerned Scots from the lowlands were really Brits in disguise. When they used the word Brit, British, Britain, they were referring to Englishmen. They never used those words when describing themselves or their geographical origins … they were never from Great Britain or British … they were from Scotland, thank you very much, and they were Scots (never Scottish) … but they preferred the term … American. (Probably also had something to with fighting in the American Revolutionary War)

    The only ones they despised more than Englishmen were Irishmen … based on many things but mainly for their catholicism.

    They also considered James a traitor for accepting the throne from Queen Lizzie … once again I’m using their words … you should be very glad they left … so should the Cardinal.

    I wish you nothing but the best as you attempt to educate your fellow Brits for I’m certain my ancestors would never call you a Scotsman.

  3. harebell:

    “Go on pal justify you going off at half cock with actual facts to cover your real hatred of furriners.”

    ****************

    Yeah, those facts are useless things in an argument, and I don’t back down off any of the words I wrote here. I don’t hate furriners though just stupid folk displaying their craft as they launch unprovoked attacks. But to make it crystal clear, I quote my favorite American expatriate Richard Blaine: harebell “if I had given you any thought, I probably would despise you.”

  4. Mespo
    strange how you chose not to defend your nasty little xenophobic comments. But when all you see are enemies, everyone of your actions are justified. Why should I take anything you say at face value given context or not. Go on pal justify you going off at half cock with actual facts to cover your real hatred of furriners.
    And as for your Army in Yurp to assure stability, yeah that had nothing to do with your own defence interests did it, just pure charity to those ungrateful folk abroad out of the goodness of your hearts. Did you miss the cold war?
    But really all I need to know about you is your hateful nature illustrated by your nasty guesswork, which you now seem to ignore.
    “Then you and yours can go back to worshiping cows, or killing folks from other tribes, or whatever manner of barbarism we (or some other Westerner) taught you to dispense with.”
    Go on, justify that bollocks.

    Blouise
    Scotland is part of Gt Britain. It’s a geographical term. Educating the English on this is tough enough please don’t add to the task.

  5. My ancestors, all Scots started their migration to these shores in the mid 1700’s (one had the distinct pleasure of kicking British arses under the command of Washington), more came in the 1800’s and fought Indians (and not one owned a slave as they felt such usury (their choice of verb, not mine) was against the laws of NATURE (note: not god … NATURE), and the rest came in 1902.

    They had very few kind words for Great Britain or for Scotland … they were Americans. My one uncle told me that the Brits fought well in WWI and WWII but that was it as far as praise for Great Britain went. My other uncle used to spit after uttering the word Britain and say the bastards raped the world for centuries.

    After talking with Bluebell on this thread I better understand the dislike my ancestors expressed. In fact, I swear there were times I heard them chuckling in my ear as I typed.

Comments are closed.