Here's more info on the case, being broadcast on Court TV about the guy fired because of mentioning the "Delores" Seinfeld episode:
Thursday June 26 6:26 PM EDT
'Seinfeld' Viewer Who Lost Job Takes It To Court
(Please note nature)
MILWAUKEE (Reuter) - A jury watched a racy episode of "Seinfeld" Thursday in a suit brought by a man who claims he was fired for sexual harassment after he discussed the hit comedy show at work.
A few muffled laughs were heard in the courtroom as the program was screened in a case brought by Jerold Mackenzie against the Miller Brewing Co., a former co-worker and a Miller executive.
Mackenzie is suing for damages, claiming Miller used an office incident involving his discussion of the "Seinfeld" episode as an excuse to fire him from an executive-level job.
The episode Mackenzie says got him in trouble involved the Jerry Seinfeld character forgetting the name of a woman with whom he was developing a relationship. She tells him it rhymes with a female body part, leading to a series of word-play jokes.
At the end of the show, Seinfeld realizes the woman's name is Dolores -- but not until after she has found him out and left.
Mackenzie, 54, told the Milwaukee County Circuit Court jury Thursday that his dismissal left such a black mark on his record that he has not been able to hold a steady job since then. He was fired in March of 1993, shortly after the "Seinfeld" episode aired.
He testified that he discussed the show with the female co-worker named in the suit, but she did not get the joke. He said he later photocopied a dictionary page listing the word "clitoris" and showed it to her so he would not have to say the word out loud.
Her response, he said, was that she did not want to talk about it.
He said the co-worker became upset, and he later apologized.
He also testified that he was not a regular fan of the top-rated show and watched it in part because of Miller's sponsorship of the program. A commercial for Miller ran on the episode in question.
"People were buzzing about it," Mackenzie said of discussion at his office about the episode, adding that he was surprised it had passed the broadcast censors.
A Miller spokesman said, "this is not really that big of a case from our standpoint."
"This more about Jerry Seinfeld than about Jerry Mackenzie," he added. "This is not a case about sexual harassment or wrongful dismissal. It's about a rather narrow complaint regarding Mr. Mackenzie's employment contract with our company."
Reuters/Variety