On Pain and Suffering and Absurdity

So here is a hypothetical that was presented in law school:

I have searched the world over looking for the perfect garden gnome, and finally I found him. Here he is:

Burt

This is Burt. There are a million garden gnomes in the world, but only one Burt. There may indeed be a million garden gnomes just like Burt in the world, but there is only one Burt. I searched the world over, looking for Burt. I finally, after years of searching and travelling, found Burt. There may be millions like Burt, but Burt is mine, and I loved Burt.

Ahhhh, the glory! My garden, my life!, was finally complete. That is, until my neighbor's dog, Cupcake, came along.

Here's Cupcake:

Cupcake

Apparently, Cupcake didn't like Burt as much as I did, because this is what became of Burt:

When Burt met Cupcake

I want to sue my neighbor.

Granted, Burt only cost me $14.95, but his value to me was considerably higher. I mean, after all, I spent years searching for the perfect Burt, and I was emotionally invested in Burt. I spent considerable amounts of time searching for Burt, and I know what my time is worth because my clients pay for it.

So, I figure that I should certainly get my $15 purchase price back. I should also get compensated for the hundreds of hours that I spent looking for the perfect Burt. Finally, I should be compensated for the emotional pain and suffering I had to endure watching Cupcake destroy Burt.

Therefore, I will demand $15 (purchase) + $15,000 (my time) + $50,000 (my emotional suffering).

What do you think, both readers? Can I get it? Should I?

(Disclaimer: For those who didn't pick up on it, this is a work of fiction)

UPDATE: Per Indiana law, you get the $15. No compensation for time or emotional suffering. I won't get into the policy reasons for that, but suffice it to say, the world of litigation is not the "get rich quick scheme" that non-lawyers often characterize it as.