Looks like it's fine and dandy to refer to someone as a skank on the radio, as a San Francisco appellate court has tossed out a woman's suit against local rock station Alice 97.3 FM.
The woman, a losing contestant on the television show "Who Wants to Marry a Multimillionaire?", sued Infinity Broadcasting Corp. as well as assorted members of the "Sarah and Vinnie Show" after she was referred to as a "chicken butt," a "local loser," and a "big skank" during an on-air broadcast.
The woman, who formally worked in the sales department of another San Francisco radio station owned by Infinity, claimed she was humiliated by the broadcast, even though they did not use her name.
The 1st District Court of Appeal, however, said the sophomoric phrases were more appropriately characterized as a schoolyard taunt than actual defamation.
Besides, the court ruled, no one really knows what skank means.
The woman's attorney said it was clear the appellate justices were a little out of touch. He said his client, who was so distraught by the broadcast that she quit her job and moved to Los Angeles, is deciding whether to appeal the case to the state high court.
"The problem was that the appellate court used their own experience as a benchmark," he said. "But the audience of that broadcast certainly knows what the term skank means."
In the unanimous ruling, the court stated that the fact that considerable public interest had been generated by the show, and on the sort of person that would marry a complete stranger in exchange for the notoriety and supposed financial rewards.
"By having chosen to participate as a contestant in the show, plaintiff voluntarily subjected herself to inevitable scrutiny and potential ridicule by the public and the media," Justice Mark Simons wrote for the three-judge panel.
__________________
"Most of us fall short much more by omission than by commission."
A Georgia inmate is suing the prison where she is serving a sentence for burglary and aggravated assault because she says the facility is infested with spiders.
Marcia Wall's lawsuit, filed in federal court in Atlanta, says she and other inmates at the Washington State Prison in Davisboro have been bitten repeatedly by spiders and that they have been denied them proper treatment.
"They live here with us," Wall said. "We've got to share this place with them. But it's getting crazy."
A Department of Corrections spokeswoman, who would not comment on the lawsuit, said the 1,000-bed prison is fumigated once a month by a pest control company.
"We don't want anyone to get bit by spiders," the spokeswoman said. "We're responsible for their health as well as their well-being. Any time they let us know, we try to correct the problem that is happening."
Wall's lawyer, McNeill Stokes, said inmates have sent him envelopes filled with dead spiders as proof of the infestation.
Wall and other inmates want prison officials to seal faulty window screens, clean up webs around the prison grounds and take their medical claims seriously.
__________________
"Most of us fall short much more by omission than by commission."
Probably not Joseph Bisignano from West Des Moines. At least not anymore.
Poor old Joe estimates that he spent more than $330,000 over the past two years trying to woo Mary Toon, a woman he thought would become his bride.
His fourth bride.
She didn't.
And now he wants his money back.
Do I smell a lawsuit brewing? You betcha.
Bisignano has filed a lawsuit seeking to have Ms. Toon fork over the $129,000 in gifts he gave her plus pay him back the $201,259 in loans and purchases he made for her.
The lawsuit alleges, among other things, fraud, breach of contract and "unjust enrichment" if Toon is allowed to keep the fruits of their courtship.
Some of the gifts included a fur coat, a designer wedding dress, artwork, furniture and a 9-plus-carat diamond ring. In addition, Bisignano alleges he loaned Toon $165,000 for an investment and the purchase of a truck.
Getting herself into legal hot water isn't anything new to Ms. Toon. According to court records, Toon would have lost a substantial amount of her own alimony if she and Bisignano had married.
A 1999 divorce decree says cardiac surgeon Richard Toon is required to pay his ex-wife an amount equal to 40 percent of his gross income. The payments, estimated at approximately $11,666 a month in late 1999, would terminate if Mary Toon remarries or if either party dies (either Toon, that is).
Both Toons are scheduled to be in court later this month as part of a long-standing legal battle. The court fights have included repeated allegations of various unpaid debts and undisclosed income.
Looks like Joe will have to stand in line ... again.
__________________
"Most of us fall short much more by omission than by commission."
Four women have sued an Irvine restaurant after one of them claims she found a condom in her clam chowder when dining there last year.
One of the women, a Ms. Laila Sultan, said she was eating at McCormick & Schmick's Seafood Restaurant when she bit into something rubbery.
When she spit it out, Sultan said she discovered it was an unwrapped, rolled-up condom.
She said she spent the next 15 minutes in a restroom vomiting and has since seen a psychiatrist and taken medication for depression and anxiety.
Sultan and her three dining companions, who were all having the clam chowder that day, filed a lawsuit claiming negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
On February 26, 2002, Sultan says she and her companions ordered drinks, appetizers and soup, but sent the soup back because it was lukewarm. When she got it back she found the condom.
At the forthcoming trial, the restaurant chain will argue that "there is absolutely no evidence to suggest the restaurant was the source of the condom, or any employee of the restaurant," said Patrick Stark, the attorney for McCormick & Schmick's, according to The Los Angeles Times.
"Either it came from (the four women) or it was thrown in as a practical joke by another patron at the restaurant."
The women said the condom was seized by the restaurant manager and not returned to them.
The women's lawsuit says the condom was "a possibly used one," but Stark told The Times that, because it was rolled up, "it was clearly unused."
Source: NBC4.tv, Los Angeles Times, "Women Sue After Finding Condom In Chowder, Customer Takes Rubbery Bite Of Chowder," November 11, 2003.
-- GOOD NEWS! --
The chewy chowder lawsuit has been resolved.
The case was scheduled to begin on January 19, 2004 in Orange County Superior Court but was canceled after the two sides reached a resolution. Details were not released.
"The case has been resolved in its entirety," lawyers for both sides said in a joint statement Monday. "Both sides are happy with the outcome."
Soup anyone?
__________________
"Most of us fall short much more by omission than by commission."
They say that birds of a feather flock together. That may be true, but at least a Florida judge has pooh-poohed a man's attempt to hold his bird-friendly neighbors responsible for excessive droppings in his yard.
After years of chasing birds out of his fruit garden and scraping droppings off his boat, Edward Renna filed a bird brain small claims lawsuit against his neighbors, Marian and Chuck Butler, who reportedly feed neighborhood birds with 40 pounds of seeds each week.
Renna, a contractor, asked the judge for an injunction to prevent the Butlers from feeding the birds. Oh, by the way, he also sought $5,000 in damages to his fruit trees, boat and dock, as well as the mental anguish he purportedly suffered scooping poop.
Apparently, he did not meet the "bird-en" of proof.
While Hernando County Judge Peyton Hyslop did acknowledge that the Butlers' ample bird feedings likely contributed to Renna's poop problem, he said Renna did not prove that the Butlers were the sole source of the problem.
Hyslop declined to award damages and ordered each side to pay its own court costs.
__________________
"Most of us fall short much more by omission than by commission."
Most of us have suffered through a bad hair day at one time or another. You know what I'm talking about here, don't you? It's one of those days when your 'do - doesn't.
Now it looks like a St. Louis area woman has turned a bad hair day into a pay day. A jury awarded Geremie Hoff, 56, of suburban Creve Coeur, $6,000 to Ms. Hoff, who sued the Elizabeth Arden Salon for emotional distress, depression, counseling and lost income. Ms. Hoff claimed that a bad hair treatment applied by the salon left her depressed and led her to seek early retirement.
According to testimony, Hoff went to the salon Aug. 9, 2001, seeking to have her curly hair straightened.
Stylist Reye Hudson, who is still with the salon but was not named in the suit, applied a hair relaxer, then washed and styled Hoff's hair.
Hoff testified that clumps of her hair came loose that night, and her resulting bald spots and brittle hair made her depressed and reclusive. Hoff's attorney said she was so distressed she retired early from teaching and stopped working as a tour guide for trips to Italy.
The defense attorney said Hudson didn't test Hoff's hair before applying the product, but that the stylist could judge who needed one based on her 30 years of experience.
Jurors found the stylist negligent. They did not describe how they arrived at the $6,000 figure.
__________________
"Most of us fall short much more by omission than by commission."
"Most of us fall short much more by omission than by commission."
