One day, Joshua Gnaizda, a three-yearold, received what he (or his mother) thought was a tantalizing offer in the mail from Time, Inc. The front of the envelope contained a see-through window that revealed the following statement: “Joshua Gnaizda, I’ll give you this versatile new calculator watch free just for opening this envelope.” Beneath the offer was a picture of the calculator watch itself. When Joshua’s mother opened the envelope, she realized that the seethrough window had not revealed the full text of Time’s offer. Not viewable through the see-through window were the following words: “And mailing this Certificate today.” The certificate required Joshua to purchase a subscription to Fortune magazine in order to receive the free calculator watch. Joshua (through his father, a lawyer) sued Time in a class action lawsuit, seeking compensatory damages in an amount equal to the value of the calculator watch and $15 million in punitive damages. The trial court dismissed the lawsuit as being too trivial for the court to hear. Joshua appealed. Should Joshua be permitted to maintain his lawsuit against Time, Inc.? Did Time act ethically? Should Joshua’s father have sued for $15 million? Harris v. Time, Inc., 191 Cal.App.3d 449, 237 Cal. Rptr. 584, Web 1987 Cal.App. Lexis 1619 (Court of Appeals of California)