Bride Sued for Wrong Wedding Flower Color

Posted by Alex in Everything Else on November 10, 2007 at 2:26 pm


When lawyer and bride Elana Glatt was dissatisfied with the color (and freshness) of her centerpieces in her wedding, she did something that comes naturally to lawyers: she sued the florist!

“The use of predominantly pastel centerpieces had a significant impact on the look of the room and was entirely inconsistent with the vision the plaintiffs had bargained for,” Ms. Glatt, a lawyer who practices under the name Elana Elbogen, said in the lawsuit, which she filed on behalf of herself, her husband and her mother-in-law, Tobi Glatt, who paid for the flowers.

Elana Glatt said they had reluctantly paid for the flowers in advance, with a cashier’s check for $27,435.14. She accused the florist of a “bait and switch” scheme, and asked for more than $400,000 in restitution and damages for, among other things, “unjust enrichment” by the florist. In a litany of “distressing and embarrassing” offenses, the lawsuit says the florist substituted cheaper orchids than promised in the bridal bouquet and provided the equivalent of $5 roses from a street vendor, but charged $55 to $65 for those arrangements.

The florists, Stamos Arakas of Posy Floral Design, has this to say:

“My father used to tell me, ‘Don’t deal with lawyers,’” Mr. Arakas said. “Maybe he was right, God bless his soul.”

Links: NY Times article - via Above The Law blog, who has a photo of the lovely (but angry) bride

Previously on Neatorama: Tale of the $54 Million Pants | There is Justice After All: $54 Million Pants Lawsuit Thrown Out


Previous post
this post? Please Email this               
Next post

FROM THE NEATORAMA ONLINE STORE - Your purchase helps support the blog!

COMMENT

23 comments to "Bride Sued for Wrong Wedding Flower Color"

  1. meg
    November 10th, 2007 at 2:28 pm

    America! Where everyone sues everyone always for everything!

    Or maybe the media pays too much attention to these trivial cases brought on by morons.

  2. MostlyDifferent
    November 10th, 2007 at 3:11 pm

    The real crime is spending $27,435.14 on flowers. Holy crap!

  3. aws
    November 10th, 2007 at 3:29 pm

    My guess is that the lawsuit will last longer than the marriage.

  4. Siduri
    November 10th, 2007 at 4:28 pm

    On one hand, I’d be pissed if I spent 30 grand on flowers and the flower company didn’t get the order right.

    On the other hand, I would never spend nearly thirty grand on flowers. Jesus Christ. Does anyone ever remember the floral arrangement at a wedding? Just spend enough money on giving your guests an open bar and I promise they won’t notice the flowers.

  5. John J.
    November 10th, 2007 at 5:45 pm

    Lawyers are as big as scums as news reporters, criminals, and psychiatrists.

  6. Jess
    November 10th, 2007 at 5:53 pm

    John J, phychiatrists? Really? So how’s Xenu doing these days?

  7. Elana
    November 10th, 2007 at 6:23 pm

    SHE HAS MY NAME!!!

  8. Skipweasel
    November 10th, 2007 at 6:34 pm

    Frankly, anyone who spends that much on flowers for a wedding deserves to be taken to the cleaners for as much as the florist can manage.

    Weddings are much more fun if they’re arranged and created by friends and family instead of buckets of money. More meaningful, too - all those people you know all have a personal investment in helping you make your marriage a success.

  9. ted
    November 10th, 2007 at 7:27 pm

    That’s a lot to spend on flowers. That’s more than a starving Hollywood writer makes in a week.

  10. donna
    November 10th, 2007 at 7:44 pm

    27K would buy a lot of flowers for a lot of people.

    Perhaps these asshats ought to consider generosity over their ridiculous selfishness.

  11. Lester
    November 10th, 2007 at 7:49 pm

    Wait, why does someone deserve to be taken to the cleaners because they spent a lot on a floral arrangement? I didn’t know there was some limit on price, and if you crossed that line, you deserve to be screwed over. I can understand suing if the florist really screwed up a 30k order - especially if he didn’t stick to his contract obligations. Would I sue? I have no idea. Probably not. I’ve never sued anyone in my life. But if I paid 30k up front and signed a contract, and the contract obligations weren’t adhered to, I can totally understand the suit.

    But before you throw stones at the woman who spent an exorbitant amount on flower arrangements, stop and look at your life and ask if you haven’t made any purchases that some might see as exorbitant. We’ve all made purchases that SOME people would consider sky high. I mean, I’ve got four computers in my house and just about every gadget I can get my hands on. I know a guy who’s spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on a coin collection. That’s his passion. Mine’s technology. Some peoples’ are art. Some people just like to have the best if they’re going to spend their money. I imagine that’s what this lady wanted.

    That being said, I keep going back and forth on whether I’d want this woman as a client of mine. I mean, she’s definitely willing to pay for the best, and I’d be making bank probably. But holy cow. I’d be scared to make any mistakes.

  12. meg
    November 10th, 2007 at 8:42 pm

    It’s her choice to spend that much on flowers, and it’s not up to someone else to determine what she spends HER money on. Yes, it’s extravagant and unneeded, but in the end the florist fucked up, and seemed pretty shady to begin with (I’ve helped plan a couple weddings, and while we didn’t spend THAT much, we were always given a set time to pay which was always either after we had seen the exact flowers that were going to be used or after the wedding itself).

    Not that I support this asshat of a lawyer who spends more on flowers than lots of people make in a year, but she has rights, too.

  13. skh.pcola
    November 10th, 2007 at 9:33 pm

    Donna said:
    “Perhaps these asshats ought to consider generosity over their ridiculous selfishness.”

    And maybe someday, socialistic asshats will recognize that a voluntary transaction involves unselfishly giving their own money for something that they value more than the said cash. You commie pukes are laughable.

  14. CSI
    November 10th, 2007 at 9:36 pm

    “Just spend enough money on giving your guests an open bar and I promise they won’t notice the flowers.”

    If you provided my friends and relatives with an open bar I guarantee it would wind up costing far more than $30k…

  15. Me3
    November 11th, 2007 at 12:32 am

    I don’t care how much money one has: spending that much on just flowers is ridiculous. Makes one wonder just how much she spent on the entire wedding. (People sure are wastefully extravagant with weddings. It’s laughable considering how most marriages generally fare.)

    But, yeah, if she didn’t get what she ordered for, then I think that she could get some kind of compensation. Price is irrelevant.

  16. donna
    November 11th, 2007 at 1:42 pm

    I’m no commie. I am simply one who recognizes that marriage is about love, and not flowers.

  17. donna
    November 11th, 2007 at 1:43 pm

    And maybe someday selfish people will recognize that buying things is certainly not necessarily an unselfish act. Good grief.

  18. Skipweasel
    November 11th, 2007 at 2:04 pm

    “Wait, why does someone deserve to be taken to the cleaners because they spent a lot on a floral arrangement? I didn’t know there was some limit on price, and if you crossed that line, you deserve to be screwed over. ”

    But it’s in such poor taste!

  19. L
    November 11th, 2007 at 9:08 pm

    If she was that dissatisfied, she should’ve just asked for her money back… not for an extra $400,000! If a little thing like the colour of flowers causes her that much distress, I don’t hold out much hope for her marriage. I hate to think what’ll happen when she’s having pregnancy cravings and her husband buys her the wrong flavour of ice cream.

  20. Jason E.
    November 12th, 2007 at 11:03 am

    I wonder:

    How much money do people pay a month for a high-speed internet connection just so they can chit chat about little nothings with people they could just call on their cell phones… or even mail a letter to? $60, $70, $100?

    So $700 to $1200 a month that you most likely dont really have to spend. What else do you use that connection for? Looking up directions on Yahoo Maps? Not neccessary, reading news? Nice to get feeds so quickly, but also not necessary. It’s called an amenty.

    Wouldn’t you be pissed if someone told you to stop wasting money and switch at least to a dial-up connection or you are a selfish idiot? I would. Know why? It’s the USA. You work hard for you $$$ and you are allowed to spend it however you want.

    As such, all arguments based on the concept of her having “spent too much money on flowers” and the like are moot.

    Now… She entered an agreement… a signed contract. If the florist didn’t adhere to the terms. She has the right to sue. She is likely suing not only for breech, but punitive damages. If you are married, you know how important every detail of the wedding is to the bride. This may have “ruined” her dream wedding… so she tacked on extra monies to be recovered.

    Does the amount she asking to recover for punitive damages seem excessive? Yeah… sure. But, she’s allowed to. Know why? yep… USA.

    Everyone is entitled to his/her own opinion… so here’s mine. She’s not doing anything wrong. She has every right to do what she’s doing. Don’t like it? Move to China.

  21. Jason E.
    November 12th, 2007 at 2:01 pm

    “$700 to $1200 a month”

    should read “$700 to $1200 a year”

  22. Jennifer
    November 12th, 2007 at 7:24 pm

    Wait a minute folks!

    This woman is a lawyer, she would have taken classes in law school on basic contracts. As such, when she started feeling uncomfortable with the terms set forth by the florist, why didn’t she stand up and say, “Thanks, but no thanks.” It’s not like this was the only florist in the whole world. When you consent to a contract that you are not comfortable with, whose fault is it when things go wrong?

    I don’t think this woman deserved a bad deal just because she was spending $37k on flowers for one day (I do think she’s got some strange priorities), but she did get what she was asking for when paying all that money up front and agreeing to terms she wasn’t comfortable with. Tsk, as a lawyer she’s been educated not to fall into these traps. Of course, this also says she’s not really that skilled of a lawyer if she couldn’t handle a basic contract.

  23. Flower Arranging Supplies
    December 10th, 2008 at 2:37 pm

    Another case of if in doubt, sue!


PLEASE LEAVE A COMMENT

Neatorama Comment Policy
You don't have to register or login to comment, but it's easier if you do so. Comments aren't censored, but those that are abusive or off-topic may be edited or deleted.


Stay updated on the comments with Comment RSS