A lawyer from United States firm Goodwin Procter has decided to take on a rather peculiar case involving a groom's fury over the quality of his wedding photos.
As The New York Times reports, lawyer Frederick McGowen is representing plaintiff Todd Remis of Manhattan in a bizarre case in which Remis hopes to be compensated for his disappointing wedding photos.
While most of us have heard of newly married couples complaining about their wedding photos and consequently deciding to sue, what caught Folklaw's attention was the remedy Remis and his lawyer are seeking.
Disappointed that the last dance and bouquet toss were not captured by photographers H&H Photographers, Remis the groomzilla is suing the photography studio and demanding that he be repaid not only the $4,100 cost of the photography, but also a whopping $48,000 to recreate the entire wedding and have it reshot in New York by another photographer. As you do.
The idea of spending almost $50,000 may seem extravagant enough, but there are a few other minor details making this demand a little more difficult - and strange.
Reliving his wedding day will probably be a little tricky given Remis's wedding took place back in 2003 and he has since divorced his wife, who has apparently since returned to her homeland of Latvia. Yes, that's right. Remis would like to reshoot his wedding from 2003 with his Latvian ex-wife who has not yet been located.
"I need to have the wedding recreated exactly as it was so that the remaining 15 per cent of the wedding that was not shot can be shot," testified Remis.
While Folklaw is struggling to see why a lawyer would take on such a case, The New York Times reports that the plaintiff's father, Shepard Remis, is a litigation lawyer at the same firm as the plaintiff's lawyer. The plaintiff has claimed that he is paying his lawyer himself.
H&H Photographers are defending the case which they have described as "an abuse of the legal system".
Although Justice Doris Ling-Cohan of the State Supreme Court in Manhattan dismissed the majority of the lawsuit grounds, she has allowed the case to proceed to determine whether there was a breach of contract.
According to The New York Times, Remis, who has been unemployed since 2008, and his lawyer did not return phone calls.