Trending ›
Her relationship with Lindsay Lohan has made Samantha Ronson a prime target for gossip bloggers (*ahem*) and enraged by this newfound media scrutiny, the English-born DJ sued Perez Hilton for defamation for statements made on his blog.
Since then, her legal problems have spawned new ones as she is now suing her former attorney Martin Garbus for malpractice. Her new lawyer argues that Ronson felt her case was bungled, but Garbus asserts that Sam simply refused to accept a reasonable settlement from the gossip blogger.
“She just really had it out for him,” Garbus claims. I could see that. I can also see that ending things with this one has the potential to be very, very messy.
Her relationship with Lindsay Lohan has made Samantha Ronson a prime target for gossip bloggers (*ahem*) and enraged by this newfound media scrutiny, the English-born DJ sued Perez Hilton for defamation for statements made on his blog.
Since then, her legal problems have spawned new ones as she is now suing her former attorney Martin Garbus for malpractice. Her new lawyer argues that Ronson felt her case was bungled, but Garbus asserts that Sam simply refused to accept a reasonable settlement from the gossip blogger.
“She just really had it out for him,” Garbus claims. I could see that.
I can also see that ending things with this one has the potential to be
very, very messy.
Simon | December 11, 2008 at 9:07 am
“really had it out for him”
Well, duh, she’s a man hating Dyke!
Also, DJ’ing may just be the most retarded occupation on the face of the earth….For fuck sake, this chick isn’t even spinning, it’s all pre-programed on her ‘puter
T-Bone | December 11, 2008 at 9:43 am
Um, Sam’s attorney isn’t real bright, obviously. By the statements he’s making, it’s clear he’s biased against his own client. As an attorney, one must represent the client to the best of their abilities and have their clients best interests at heart, OR REFER that client to someone who is able to do that. The attorney’s use of words, “had it out for [Perez] clearly indicates a strong personal opinion against Sam. She’s right to sue him. And from what I know about Perez Hilton, she’s probably right to sue him as well.
hazel | December 11, 2008 at 9:51 am
man hating dyke? that’s a bit extreme.
RUDE.
Xicana | December 11, 2008 at 10:45 am
Simon is an idiot and a bigot. Dyke? Retarded? Chick? Please go back to your cave, you neanderthal.
I said it from day one, Sam just didn’t have a good case against Perez. It’s not easy to win a defamation suit, especially if you are a public person. There’s just a whole lot of pesky Constitutional safeguards in place to help publication of facts related to people who are in the public.
And T-Bone, at the point in which a client sues her attorney, the gloves are off. The attorney can, and should, be able to defend her or himself using any available means, thus the comment. And what does the comment mean? It does not mean that he is biased against his former client! The comment is his defense! Follow the logic: she is suing him for malpractice since she LOST her suit. He is defending himself by saying that she would have gotten money if she would have accepted a settlement! Seems that Sam lost because she WANTED to make a point of suing Perez, not because she wanted money. So her loss should not fall on an attorney who got her a settlement agreement but on her idiotic self who denied the settlement simply to make a point of suing a blogger.
T-Bone | December 11, 2008 at 11:02 am
Not completely true, X, if Sam can prove her attorney did not represent her to the best of his ability due to conflicts or biases DURING her course as a client, she has a case.
stolidog | December 11, 2008 at 12:39 pm
she might just be the stankest celebriwhore on the planet.