I found this link to be very interesting. Most of the elements of the suit have to do with the Quasi-intentional torts, except the claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress and fraud (though i am not sure if the breach in contract can be deemed tortious.) As the figure of the piece was not in the "vortex of controversy" at that time, I believe the claims will be given consideration even though she might be deemed as "unstable" by some. What are your opinions?
Also for your enjoyment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-e4vu_wL-M
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.