Quote:
Originally Posted by troutman
I think it is somewhat an alienation of affection claim disguised as an invasion of privacy/breach of contract claim. How else can she justify $600,000.00 in damages? She is blaming Rogers for the break-up of her marriage.
In a statement of defence, Rogers denies it terminated the contract and says the company "cannot be held responsible for the condition of the marriage, for the plaintiff's affair and consequential marriage break-up, nor the effects the break-up has had on her.
|
She can justify (although it's obviously a large stretch) based on the fallout of the breach of privacy. The breach caused x, which caused y etc. It's tangential, but not all that different to what you'd see in any claim where emotional distress is involved. There's also likely a fairly significant exageration taking place, as Vlad pointed out that's the norm. The goal is likely a settlement, best to aim high in that situation.
I see the blaming of Rogers for the break-up of the marriage as a damage issue, not an aspect of the claim. At least that's how I'd frame it, arguing it as alienation of affections seems like a good way to face sanctions for bringing a claim clearly not recognized.