Lawyer Bride Sues Florist for $400,000
Here are the facts: Like any bride, she wants her day to be perfect; this entails the use of "rust" colored and dark green hydrangeas. What she got instead was pastels, and, according to the lawsuit she, a practicing attorney, filed herself, "extreme disappointment, distress and embarrassment." The florist asserts that he warned the bride that the flowers she requested would be based on availability and due to lighting, they might appear different than the flowers she had requested in a photograph. She counters that that they paid $30,000 for flowers they did not receive in addition to their being placed in "dirty," half-full (hey- at least she's an optimist) vases. So she sued the florst for $400,000.
So we've got ourselves a moral quandry. As brides, we understand the obsession with wanting things to be perfect on one's Perfect Day. We could see maybe having a similar meltdown if a key element of the wedding was horribly botched. But here's another quandry in that quandry. Did anyone else notice? Did any guest care that the hydrangeas clased with the favor boxes and linens? Is that a moot point since, clearly, the bride was so distraught? Just because she could, does it mean that this bride should have sued for such a large amount? Is this simply another case of cooler heads failing to prevail and giving brides - and litigious Americans - a bad name? Or is there a part of you that would - or wishes you would - take such action?
Inevitably this story is going to be spread like wildfire through the media outlets and snap judgements will be made. But what do you think? Bridezilla in the extreme or just cause?
Read the actual story here. Registration for NYTimes required.
So we've got ourselves a moral quandry. As brides, we understand the obsession with wanting things to be perfect on one's Perfect Day. We could see maybe having a similar meltdown if a key element of the wedding was horribly botched. But here's another quandry in that quandry. Did anyone else notice? Did any guest care that the hydrangeas clased with the favor boxes and linens? Is that a moot point since, clearly, the bride was so distraught? Just because she could, does it mean that this bride should have sued for such a large amount? Is this simply another case of cooler heads failing to prevail and giving brides - and litigious Americans - a bad name? Or is there a part of you that would - or wishes you would - take such action?
Inevitably this story is going to be spread like wildfire through the media outlets and snap judgements will be made. But what do you think? Bridezilla in the extreme or just cause?
Read the actual story here. Registration for NYTimes required.
posted by Melissa | 5:47 AM
2 Comments:
think she is right and for all the money she spent, he should have complied with her requested order. He's arrogant and just thought she would go away. Good for her. I hope his reputation is permanently tarnished.....
I think she is over doing it. If she was told that her $30,000 arangement might not looked as she planned because of whatever, she should have thought about what she was ordering. If she spent $30,000 on flowers then just imagine what she spent on everything else. She was getting her wedding for free, be it sueing the flowerist, the cake maker for the frosting not being the correct shade of off white, or the limo driver for, oh-my-gawd, letting a bird crap of the car before she could get into it. Her case should have been thrown out and she should have had to pay for everyone's time she waisted.
-Dianne
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home