Posts tagged as:

Victoria’s Secret

June 30 roundup

by Walter Olson on June 30, 2008

  • To hold a party in the public parks of Bergenfield, N.J., you’ll need homeowner’s or renter’s insurance to throw on the line [Bergen Record]

  • More on suits against Victoria’s Secret over allegedly hazardous bras, thongs, and undergarments, including an aspiring class action over contact rashes [Heller/On Point News]

  • Supreme Court will review Navy sonar controversy, which we’ve long covered in this space [Adler @ Volokh]

  • Hope of legalized online gambling fades, and you can blame Republicans on Capitol Hill for that [Stuttaford, NRO "Corner"]

  • Disney said to be behind bad proposal to soak foreign tourists to fund visit-America promotions [Crooked Timber]

  • “Squishier than most”: Nocera on A.M.D.’s predatory-pricing antitrust suit against Intel [NYT]

  • Process serving company lied about delivering SEC witness subpoena and falsified later document, judge rules, awarding victim $3 million [Boston Globe]

  • Revisiting the false-accusation ordeal of Dr. Patrick Griffin, and how it relates to pressure to have needless chaperones at medical procedures [Buckeye Surgeon, Dorothy Rabinowitz Pulitzer piece]

  • Overlawyered turns nine years old tomorrow (more). Commenters: how long have you been reading the site? Any of you go back to its first year?

Tagged as: , , , , , , ,

{ 8 comments }

Thong shrapnel alleged in Victoria’s Secret suit

by Walter Olson on June 19, 2008

Macrida Patterson and her lawyer Jason Buccat say the lingerie store chain should pay for an incident in which a bit of rhinestone decoration flew off the slingshot-like undergarment as she was pulling it on, hitting her in the eye; the next morning she visited a hospital, though the only medical intervention the article mentions is that she took “some topical steroid”. They’ve been on the Today show, but Victoria’s Secret says it hasn’t been served with a suit or been given a chance to examine the item of saucy apparel, which Patterson had owned for a while and had worn and laundered previously. (Mike Celizic, “Eye-catching thong gives rise to lawsuit”, MSNBC, Jun. 19; “Dinged by a G-string?”, The Smoking Gun, Jun. 17).

P.S. Not to be confused with the exploding-bra claim against Victoria’s Secret this spring from South Carolina, the original coverage of which is still available on GoogleCache for the moment, though no longer online at the local paper.

P.P.S. Above the Law, I see, was here first.

Tagged as:

{ 9 comments }