Vacations can take many forms. Depending on what you want, they can be exciting, relaxing, inspiring, or any combination of the three. For Faycal Manz, his trip to New York City was something else entirely — litigious. Given the results of his three civil lawsuits, he probably wishes his vacation had been relaxing instead.
With his dropping of a $10 million suit against the NYC Police Department (NYPD) in mid-March, Manz has officially struck out in three attempts to address perceived injuries he claims occurred during his 2024 vacation. This included a $10 million discrimination lawsuit against Walmart because he couldn’t access their Wi-Fiwifi network without a U.S. phone number, which was dismissed in July 2025, and a $100,000 claim against a Manhattan taqueria over the spiciness of their salsa. The latter ended with a summary judgment in the Southern District of New York in favor of the defendants, issued by a federal judge in February 2026.
Manz, a part-time law student who represented himself in all three suits, might want to consider using a travel agent for his next trip abroad. Or, perhaps, a practicing lawyer. His apparent shock over Mexican food being spicy likely has many New Yorkers shaking their heads and muttering “tourists” under their breath, but it did raise the question of whether Los Tacos No. 1 had a duty of care to inform him that their spicy salsa was not for the weak of heart (or weak of tongue).
Does He Also Not Dip a Toe in the Water Before Jumping Into a Pool?
For Manz, his August 2024 sojourn to New York City is more likely to be an episode on Shudder than on the Travel Channel. Wanting to try an authentic New York taqueria, Manz visited Los Tacos No. 1 in Times Square, one of the taco chain’s 10 locations. After purchasing three tacos, he headed to the self-service salsa bar to add toppings. That, according to his lawsuit, was where the problems began.
Because the taco shop didn’t post any signs warning about excessive spice levels, Manz claims he felt comfortable adding a generous amount of the restaurant’s green salsa (labeled “medium”) to one of his tacos. Moments after taking his first bite, he alleges he felt a burning in his mouth and on his tongue. According to his Apple Watch, his pulse rate jackrabbited. In addition to feeling nauseous, Manz said he suffered tongue blisters. He later experienced gastrointestinal issues and diarrhea, which he said wouldn't have occurred if the salsa had adequate warnings about its spiciness.
While he called his wife back in Germany and took pictures of his tongue, Manz didn’t seek medical treatment, alert the restaurant, or end his vacation prematurely. His suit against the restaurant, filed in October 2024, charged negligence, gross negligence, and deceptive practices under Section 349 of New York’s General Business Law (GBL). He also called for sanctions against Los Tacos No. 1 for claiming they had been improperly served.
U.S. District Court Judge Dale E. Ho proved to have no stomach for Manz’s claims, denying his motion and dawarding Los Tacos No. 1 a summary judgment on February 17, 2026. Judge Ho didn’t consider Mexican food's spiciness to be breaking news and found that Manz, who didn’t supply any expert testimony or another example of someone being harmed by the spice level, failed to prove the restaurant was negligent in any respect regarding the salsa's spiciness. He also noted that Manz admitted he was “predisposed to spice-related ailments,” which made ladling a copious amount of salsa on his taco without first testing the heat level a dubious decision at best.
In quashing Manz’s Section 349 count, Judge Ho suggested Manz could have asked an employee about the salsa’s spiciness before digging in. The court also ruled that Manz, who had handed his complaint to an employee of Los Tacos No. 1, had improperly served his lawsuit. The court therefore denied his motion for sanctions.
Maybe Not Quite Back in the New York Groove
The rest of Manz’s trip also proved eventful. A few days later, he was unable to connect to the Wi-Fi network at a Walmart in Secaucus, New Jersey, because his phone had a German phone number. Later that evening, he allegedly witnessed two men assaulting a third person near Times Square and attempted to report the incident via 911. He alleges that his difficulty providing a street address delayed the response, and the attackers were gone before NYPD officers arrived. Manz claims that when the officers refused to take his statement, he decided he’d had enough of his terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day.
Manz’s pair of $10 million suits — one against Walmart, the other targeting the NYPD — claimed discrimination, which caused “significant emotional distress.” Manz’s inability to use Walmart’s network to call his wife caused flashbacks to mistreatment that required his later resumption of therapy sessions. He claims the NYPD’s inability to return a call to his foreign number exacerbated his emotional distress. The NYPD’s inability to call back a foreign number further exacerbated his suffering.
A district judge in New Jersey dismissed Manz’s suit against Walmart with prejudice in July 2025. Manz’s recent dropping of his complaint against the NYPD may mean he lost all three cases, but the news wasn’t all bad. On a subsequent visit to the same Walmart, Manz was able to connect to the Wi-Fi network with his German phone number.
Related Resources
- Is Suing a Restaurant Your Best Course of Action? (FindLaw’s Law and Daily Life)
- Traveling Abroad? Legal Lessons for Staying Out of Trouble (FindLaw’s Law and Daily Life)
- What Is Discrimination? (FindLaw’s Civil Rights Law Overview)
