A Los Angeles woman (of course, it has to be a California woman) claims she was injured by her Victoria’s Secret thong, prompting her to sue the underwear manufacturer.
The plaintiff in the case, Macrida Patterson, 52, attributed the May 2007 injury to a Victoria’s Secret “low-rise v-string,” according to a court document.
Patterson’s lawyer said that a “design problem” caused a decorative metallic piece on the underwear to fly up and hit Patterson in the eye while she was putting the underwear on.
Patterson’s product liability lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court last week.
Ms. Patterson and her attorney were on The Today Show yesterday, showing the defective thong and seemingly enjoying the publicity the suit has brought.
Talk about a useless claim! The lawyer was asked repeatedly how much they are suing for, and repeatedly he said that money wasn’t the issue, they were trying to get Victoria’s Secret to correct a defective product and to ensure the safety of others. If that were true, wouldn’t you try to sit down with the company representatives, show them the problem, and then work with them on a solution? Apparently, that didn’t happen. The issue went straight to a lawsuit. Yet, the lawyer maintained: it’s all about safety!
You’ve got to be kidding! It’s about safety? It’s about a company being responsible? It’s about a defective product? Yeah right! This is just another example of someone trying to get something for nothing!
The lawyer finally admitted that their lawsuit asks for $25,000 in damages. I’m going to be honest with you. I doubt very seriously that I would go on national TV (either as the person suing or the lawyer representing the client) for a $25,000 claim about my underwear! I just don’t see that happening. I don’t see it happening for $250,000 either. You see, it’s not the dollar amount that matters, it’s how quickly we forget our shame!
I’m afraid there’s not much shame left.
What is our country coming to?
LEGAL DISCLAIMER:
This Web site has been prepared solely for the purpose of providing information that is important to Steve Heartsill and his readers. This Web site has been compiled in good faith by Steve Heartsill. However, no representation is made as to the completeness or accuracy of the information it contains. In particular, you should be aware that this information may be incomplete, may contain errors or may have become out of date. Steve Heartsill reserves the right to add, modify or delete any information at this Web site at any time. This publication and any references to products or services are provided ‘as is’ without any warranty or implied term of any kind. This Web site is meant to be fun, to cause us to laugh at ourselves, and if we can't laugh at ourselves and our silly world, then we really need to work on getting a life! That should satisfy any lawyer reading this blog—or at least I hope so!
The plaintiff in the case, Macrida Patterson, 52, attributed the May 2007 injury to a Victoria’s Secret “low-rise v-string,” according to a court document.
Patterson’s lawyer said that a “design problem” caused a decorative metallic piece on the underwear to fly up and hit Patterson in the eye while she was putting the underwear on.
Patterson’s product liability lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court last week.
Ms. Patterson and her attorney were on The Today Show yesterday, showing the defective thong and seemingly enjoying the publicity the suit has brought.
Talk about a useless claim! The lawyer was asked repeatedly how much they are suing for, and repeatedly he said that money wasn’t the issue, they were trying to get Victoria’s Secret to correct a defective product and to ensure the safety of others. If that were true, wouldn’t you try to sit down with the company representatives, show them the problem, and then work with them on a solution? Apparently, that didn’t happen. The issue went straight to a lawsuit. Yet, the lawyer maintained: it’s all about safety!
You’ve got to be kidding! It’s about safety? It’s about a company being responsible? It’s about a defective product? Yeah right! This is just another example of someone trying to get something for nothing!
The lawyer finally admitted that their lawsuit asks for $25,000 in damages. I’m going to be honest with you. I doubt very seriously that I would go on national TV (either as the person suing or the lawyer representing the client) for a $25,000 claim about my underwear! I just don’t see that happening. I don’t see it happening for $250,000 either. You see, it’s not the dollar amount that matters, it’s how quickly we forget our shame!
I’m afraid there’s not much shame left.
What is our country coming to?
LEGAL DISCLAIMER:
This Web site has been prepared solely for the purpose of providing information that is important to Steve Heartsill and his readers. This Web site has been compiled in good faith by Steve Heartsill. However, no representation is made as to the completeness or accuracy of the information it contains. In particular, you should be aware that this information may be incomplete, may contain errors or may have become out of date. Steve Heartsill reserves the right to add, modify or delete any information at this Web site at any time. This publication and any references to products or services are provided ‘as is’ without any warranty or implied term of any kind. This Web site is meant to be fun, to cause us to laugh at ourselves, and if we can't laugh at ourselves and our silly world, then we really need to work on getting a life! That should satisfy any lawyer reading this blog—or at least I hope so!
Don't think I would go on national TV, local TV, radio or any other media to tell the world what type of underwear I wear. That seems to be a rather "private" area of my life. Now if I could just get my wife...nah never mind. :) This has got sermon illustration all over it.
ReplyDelete