Stop the presses! Tobacco warrior John Banzhaf, a legal advisor to fast-food plaintiff Caesar Barber (the undisciplined opportunist who sued four restaurant chains in July because he ate too much of their food) told CNN on Monday evening that “that case is gone.”

But don’t think for a moment that Banzhaf, Samuel Hirsch (Mr. Barber’s attorney of record), and their ice-cream-truck-chasing buddies are going away quietly. On CNN’s “Crossfire,” Banzhaf said Monday night that he and Hirsch are cooking up an additional way to keep themselves in business: suing fast-food restaurants on behalf of children.

Banzhaf apparently hopes to capitalize on the misguided notion that parents are incapable of deciding what their kids should eat. But in response to Banzhaf’s new raison d’etre, the Center for Consumer Freedom’s John Doyle asked a few pointed questions about these newly minted, pint-sized plaintiffs:

DOYLE: “Did they drive themselves in?”

BANZHAF: “Just — just …”

DOYLE: “Did they drive themselves in? Of course they did not. Did they pay with their own money?”

BANZHAF: “No.”

DOYLE: “Their parents took them. They’re trying to…”

BANZHAF: “That’s legally irrelevant. You don’t…”

DOYLE: “How can it be irrelevant? You’re trying to…”

BANZHAF: “Let me explain it to you. Contributory negligence of parents is not a defense to actions by children. If these kids are lured in, if they are made fat…”

DOYLE: “How did the children — how did the children lure the parents? Was there some leverage, was there physical violence? Or threats?”