In a ruling that legal experts are calling "predictable" and "honestly kind of hilarious," an Alaska judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by David Streever, a man who attempted to sue the state over the fact that ice is, apparently, slippery.
Streever, who slipped and fell on an icy sidewalk in Anchorage back in 2022, argued that the state owed him damages because ice "should come with some kind of warning." His legal filing reportedly suggested that the government had a responsibility to label frozen water as "potentially hazardous," a move his lawyer described as "reasonable" and everyone else described as "the legal equivalent of putting a warning label on a rock that says 'may be heavy.'"
The court, in a stunning display of common sense, disagreed.
Judge Margaret Doyle ruled that ice being slippery is not a government secret, but rather a fundamental fact of physics that humanity has collectively understood since roughly the first time someone stepped on a frozen puddle and ate it. "The plaintiff's argument that the state concealed the slippery nature of ice is without merit," Doyle wrote. "Ice has been slippery for approximately 4.5 billion years. The court declines to issue a warning label for a substance that predates the concept of warning labels."
Streever, for his part, told local reporters he was "disappointed" and plans to appeal, because apparently the first ruling didn't cost him enough money. "I just think people deserve to know," he said, standing on a sidewalk that was, at the time of the interview, visibly icy. He did not fall during the interview, which his legal team is presumably calling a win.
Reaction online was swift and merciless. One Reddit user wrote, "This is the same energy as suing God because you got rained on." Another commented, "Bro really looked at frozen water and thought, 'You know who's liable for this? The government.'" A third simply posted the gif of a penguin slipping on ice, which pretty much summed up the entire discourse.
Legal analysts point out that Streever's case was doomed from the start, not because slip-and-fall lawsuits are never valid—they absolutely can be, when a property owner fails to maintain safe conditions—but because suing the *state* over the *existence of winter* is a bold legal strategy that only works in a universe where the Constitution has a clause about weather.
"This is what happens when you watch too many 'you can sue anyone for anything' commercials at 3 a.m.," said Anchorage-based attorney Greg Halloran. "The law requires negligence. Ice existing in Alaska in January is not negligence. It's a Tuesday."
Streever's lawsuit also sought an injunction requiring the state to "issue a public advisory every time it gets cold," which the court noted would essentially require the government to broadcast a 24/7 weather channel that just says "it's cold, be careful" on a loop until spring.
For now, Streever says he's not giving up. He's reportedly considering a new lawsuit, this time against gravity, for "failing to provide adequate support." We'll keep you posted on that one, assuming the courts don't just throw it into a snowbank.
**Opinion:** Look, slipping on ice sucks. We've all done it. But suing the government because water freezes is the kind of logic that makes you wonder if some people have ever actually been outside. The judge made the right call, the internet got its laughs, and somewhere, a lawyer is billing hours for a case that should have been a strongly worded text to a friend.