Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 9/20/2005 11:22:35 AM EDT
There is just sooo much that is wrong, here...



'Extreme' tragedy

'Ugly' mom sues ABC for nixing makeover

By MICHELLE CARUSO


Deleese Williams can only sit and wonder what life would have been like if her extreme makeover had gone through.

LOS ANGELES - The producers of "Extreme Makeover" promised Deleese Williams "a Cinderella-like" fix for a deformed jaw, crooked teeth, droopy eyes and tiny boobs that would "transform her life and destiny."
But when the ABC reality show dumped the Texas mom the night before the life-changing plastic surgeries, it shattered her family's dream and triggered her sister Kellie McGee's suicide, says a bombshell lawsuit filed in L.A. Superior Court.

As part of the premakeover hype, producers coaxed McGee and other family members to trash Williams' looks on videotape, the suit alleges. When they suddenly pulled the plug on the project, and the promised "Hollywood smile like Cindy Crawford," a guilt-ridden McGee fell apart.

"Kellie could not live with the fact that she had said horrible things that hurt her sister. She fell to pieces. Four months later, she ended her life with an overdose of pills, alcohol and cocaine," said Wesley Cordova, a lawyer for Williams.

"This family is shredded. There is a human cost to this," Cordova said.

Williams, 30, and her husband, Mike, are raising McGee's two children, along with two kids of their own. The suit seeks unspecified money damages for breach of contract, intentional infliction of emotional distress and other offenses.

"Deleese is so hurt and humiliated, she won't leave the house now. She grocery shops at midnight," Cordova says.

ABC declined to comment on the allegations.

The show announcing Williams' selection for a mega makeover had already aired on Jan. 7, 2004, when the producers abruptly dropped her because the dental surgeon told them her recovery time would be longer than expected, Cordova said.

Williams was alone in a Los Angeles hotel room reading her pre-op instructions when a producer showed up and dashed her dream of a new life with a "pretty" face, the suit alleges.

"You will not be getting an extreme makeover after all. . . . Nothing. It doesn't fit in our time frame. You will have to go back to Texas tomorrow," the suit alleges she was coldly told.

Williams broke down sobbing: "How can I go back as ugly as I left? I was supposed to come home pretty," the suit says.

The 31-page complaint begins with the line "Deleese Williams is considered ugly."

It details a horrendous tale of pain and humiliation that began when she applied for the reality show in December 2003 and had to submit a "full body shot" video showing "all of the body parts that need help."

For years, Williams' friends and family "didn't notice or pretended not to notice" her homely looks, but once she got picked for the show, they were coached to focus on nothing but her physical flaws, the suit says.

In McGee's taped interview, she tried to play up her sister's good points. But the hard-nosed producers "peppered Kellie with questions about her childhood with the ugly Deleese . . . and repeatedly put words in her mouth," the suit says.

To please the producers, Williams' mother-in-law also laid it on thick. "She said things like 'I never believed my son would marry such an ugly woman.' " Cordova says.

The family's comments never aired on TV, but Williams, who was in an adjoining room, heard them all.

The experience ruined her family life.

"Now that she returned in the same condition in which she left, there were no secrets, no hidden feelings, no reward," the suit says.

McGee's "guilt was overwhelming." She OD'd on May 25, 2004, four months after the show's producers sent her sister packing.

"These programs are cheap to produce - there are no actors or screenwriters to pay. But there is a very high human cost," Cordova said.


Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:25:48 AM EDT
This suit should be thrown out, but more than likely they will get an out of court settlement.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:26:45 AM EDT

Originally Posted By thelastgunslinger:
This suit should be thrown out, but more than likely they will get an out of court settlement.



Maybe they'll go ahead with the surgeries/procedures after all.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:27:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By thelastgunslinger:
This suit should be thrown out, but more than likely they will get an out of court settlement.



Actually, depending on the details she may have a breach of contract action at the least.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:27:54 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 11:28:46 AM EDT by KlubMarcus]
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:28:22 AM EDT
that's messed up in ways that would make Jerry Springer sick...

EPOCH
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:28:47 AM EDT
Ugly and stupid.

That's a tough combination.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:28:53 AM EDT

Originally Posted By happycynic:

Originally Posted By thelastgunslinger:
This suit should be thrown out, but more than likely they will get an out of court settlement.



Actually, depending on the details she may have a breach of contract action at the least.



I'm betting they have clauses in the contract saying they can cancel at any time for any reason
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:29:21 AM EDT

Originally Posted By thelastgunslinger:
This suit should be thrown out, but more than likely they will get an out of court settlement.



why? Sounds to me like they really fucked her over.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:29:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 11:30:05 AM EDT by vanilla_gorilla]
Amputate at the neck.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:30:19 AM EDT
I'm on her side. This is bullshit, making promises like this, then reneging because it would take her too long to heal. They at least owe her the surgery.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:31:14 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Enigma102083:

Originally Posted By thelastgunslinger:
This suit should be thrown out, but more than likely they will get an out of court settlement.



why? Sounds to me like they really fucked her over.



All they did was decide not to have her on their show. BFD.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:31:30 AM EDT
That's just plain shitty to promise to make someone "beautiful" then turn around and say, you're outta luck.

Moral of the story: Don't fuck with people's lives.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:32:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RRTX:

Originally Posted By happycynic:

Originally Posted By thelastgunslinger:
This suit should be thrown out, but more than likely they will get an out of court settlement.



Actually, depending on the details she may have a breach of contract action at the least.



I'm betting they have clauses in the contract saying they can cancel at any time for any reason



Your probably right, but a California court may very well estop those defenses if the contract looks too one-sided.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:34:11 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 11:38:43 AM EDT by SO-COM]

Originally Posted By Mojo_Jojo:

'Ugly' mom sues ABC for nixing makeover

ABC reality show dumped the Texas mom



... Someone had sex with her?

Oh and I wonder how many times before the "suicide" the sister did cocain... Sounds like she might have OD'd and they are trying to save her from being remembered as a drug addict. Etheir way, if she didn't read the contract through enough to understand they could cancell, then she just learned a rough lesson. If they really did screw her and didn't expect her to field the legal fees to fight it, then damn they are fk'd up.

Etheir way, this might earn her some money in court or an invite to oprah.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:35:47 AM EDT

Originally Posted By happycynic:

Originally Posted By thelastgunslinger:
This suit should be thrown out, but more than likely they will get an out of court settlement.



Actually, depending on the details she may have a breach of contract action at the least.



What consideration did she offer as part of the contract other than to be there and be ugly? She was offered something for free and then didn't get it when the parameters fell through. Boo hoo. In my opinion this is what you get when you put your faith in the hands of people making reality TV for the masses and degrade yourself just to get the freebies.

I especially love how they "made" her family say mean things about her. Walking away is the very least that I would do if asked to call my family member ugly or hiddeous on national TV.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:36:48 AM EDT
I bet it settles out of court. I think she deserves SOME kind of compensation. I mean, to cancel her the NIGHT BEFORE?

She probably had to go on leave from work...make arrangements for child care, etc. And the emotional pain and disappointment she's going through..I mean come on. Just imagine.

Reality TV is teh suck. It's by far the lowest America has ever sunk with regards to programming. I don't get why people are sooo engrossed by it.

Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:37:31 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 11:37:56 AM EDT by Grunteled]

Originally Posted By purplecheese:
That's just plain shitty to promise to make someone "beautiful" then turn around and say, you're outta luck.

Moral of the story: Don't fuck with people's lives.Don't agree to let people fuck with your life for entertainment

Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:37:54 AM EDT
This thread is worthless without pics.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:38:53 AM EDT

Originally Posted By daisywench:
I bet it settles out of court. I think she deserves SOME kind of compensation. I mean, to cancel her the NIGHT BEFORE?

She probably had to go on leave from work...make arrangements for child care, etc. And the emotional pain and disappointment she's going through..I mean come on. Just imagine.

Reality TV is teh suck. It's by far the lowest America has ever sunk with regards to programming. I don't get why people are sooo engrossed by it.




Grunteled, there is your consideration. Under the law it doesn't have to be substantial. If she paid a penny in reliance upon the contract she can sue.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:39:05 AM EDT
So you're saying she deserves something because she was promised something for free and didn't get it??


Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:40:07 AM EDT

Originally Posted By thelastgunslinger:

Originally Posted By Enigma102083:

Originally Posted By thelastgunslinger:
This suit should be thrown out, but more than likely they will get an out of court settlement.



why? Sounds to me like they really fucked her over.



All they did was decide not to have her on their show. BFD.



Yes… after making a commitment to her she would get the makeover… the could have a serious problem especially if true ABC canceled after they were scheduled to begin.

The disgusting part of the whole thing is ABC (TV) is willing to exploit peoples weakness like this and even more disgusting is people actually watch the show.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:40:29 AM EDT

Originally Posted By anachronism:
I'm on her side. This is bullshit, making promises like this, then reneging because it would take her too long to heal. They at least owe her the surgery.



WTF? They OWE her nothing. She paid nothing for it so she's owed nothing at all. Maybe expenses she incurred to be there. Maybe.

Uggghhhh.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:41:14 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 11:43:03 AM EDT by 10mmFan]
Whoever posts - THIS THREAD IS USELESS WITHOUT PICTURES - should be banned!



edited to add - We have a winner already!!
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:43:59 AM EDT
Clear breach of contract.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:44:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Grunteled:

Originally Posted By anachronism:
I'm on her side. This is bullshit, making promises like this, then reneging because it would take her too long to heal. They at least owe her the surgery.



WTF? They OWE her nothing. She paid nothing for it so she's owed nothing at all. Maybe expenses she incurred to be there. Maybe.

Uggghhhh.



They made promises. Those promises may have legal effect depending on the circumstances. If ABC gets hit for failing to live up to those promises, who cares? They made their bed and they can sleep on it. My prediction is that she will end up with her makeover one way or another.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:46:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 10mmFan:
Whoever posts - THIS THREAD IS USELESS WITHOUT PICTURES - should be banned!



edited to add - We have a winner already!!



Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:49:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Grunteled:

Originally Posted By anachronism:
I'm on her side. This is bullshit, making promises like this, then reneging because it would take her too long to heal. They at least owe her the surgery.



WTF? They OWE her nothing. She paid nothing for it so she's owed nothing at all. Maybe expenses she incurred to be there. Maybe.

Uggghhhh.



Bullshit… ABC was speculating with a human like a broker speculates with stocks. ABC stood to make substantial monetary rewards by exploiting this person. ABC made a decision based on profitability due to time frame.

Now I would like to see you go in to court and argue that you had a right to breech a promise because you decided it would be to expensive or take to long.

Other than the morality questions if ABC caused a substantial upheaval/change in her life because of promises they made and then did not fulfill they absolutely owe her.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:49:56 AM EDT

Originally Posted By happycynic:

Originally Posted By Grunteled:

Originally Posted By anachronism:
I'm on her side. This is bullshit, making promises like this, then reneging because it would take her too long to heal. They at least owe her the surgery.



WTF? They OWE her nothing. She paid nothing for it so she's owed nothing at all. Maybe expenses she incurred to be there. Maybe.

Uggghhhh.



They made promises. Those promises may have legal effect depending on the circumstances. If ABC gets hit for failing to live up to those promises, who cares? They made their bed and they can sleep on it. My prediction is that she will end up with her makeover one way or another.



I make a prediction that ANOTHER NETWORK will have her on their extreme makeover show, just to throw it in ABC's face.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:50:20 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 11:51:39 AM EDT by Gatchaman]

Originally Posted By kill-9:
This thread is worthless without pics.



You asked for it
http://www.nydailynews.com/ips_rich_content/223-realitygirl.JPG
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:52:14 AM EDT
She'll win big on breach of contract.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:52:32 AM EDT

Originally Posted By vanilla_gorilla:
So you're saying she deserves something because she was promised something for free and didn't get it??





Nothing free about it. She and her family performed for the cameras, making statements that they would not have made otherwise on the promise of what the studios would do for them. The kind of surgeries that they were talking about doing to these people are not minor . . . from a pain & suffering standpoint. A whole lot of plastic surgeries do things that are considered to be forms of torture if you are awake and simply waking up afterwards could be considered cruel & unusual punishment.

Was she unrealistic to expect someone else to follow through on their contractual obligation?

In Hollywood, yes.

Not something that I would do, or condone my family members doing, but to each his own.

Free country and all that.

I believe that this is the kind of situation that the FF had in mind for lawsuits, not that I think she will win.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:53:42 AM EDT
Hell, I'd hit it. Of course I'm thinking about getting thrown in prison just for some sex!!
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:57:58 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:

Originally Posted By Grunteled:

Originally Posted By anachronism:
I'm on her side. This is bullshit, making promises like this, then reneging because it would take her too long to heal. They at least owe her the surgery.



WTF? They OWE her nothing. She paid nothing for it so she's owed nothing at all. Maybe expenses she incurred to be there. Maybe.

Uggghhhh.



Bullshit… ABC was speculating with a human like a broker speculates with stocks. ABC stood to make substantial monetary rewards by exploiting this person. ABC made a decision based on profitability due to time frame.

Now I would like to see you go in to court and argue that you had a right to breech a promise because you decided it would be to expensive or take to long.

Other than the morality questions if ABC caused a substantial upheaval/change in her life because of promises they made and then did not fulfill they absolutely owe her.



According to the article the sister commited suicide based on what they (ABC) had her do and now she has to rais her dead sisters two kids.....I'd call having to take in two more children a substantial upheaval/change in her life.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:59:09 AM EDT
Sad story...

Fucking hollywood asshats
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 12:01:35 PM EDT

I found a slightly larger version..Lady's got a point....


Link Posted: 9/20/2005 12:09:15 PM EDT


You people have no idea what the "contract" was. I'd have to be born yesderday to think that they had a contract and then in total breach of it cut her performance. I'm certain they had plenty of clauses to state that all the recovery had to take place in a certain time frame and that it all had to be acceptable for airing or it was a non starter.

The idea that her taking off time or hiring a baby sitter represents consideration to them seems to me to be BS. She did not hand them anything other than her appearance, and I'm certain that she did not negotiate the terms of that performance but simply signed what they handed her to sign.

If she thought she was dealing with anything other than snakes she was stupid. If she actually agreed and her family participated in humilating her for tape, then I have no respect or sympathy for any of them.

I'll remember this legal thread if someone ever promises me a Christmas gift I don't get. That bastard is going to pay now that I know my feelings and emotional truma being made me a contract even if they weren't my terms.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 12:15:34 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 12:18:26 PM EDT by Grunteled]

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:

Originally Posted By Grunteled:

Originally Posted By anachronism:
I'm on her side. This is bullshit, making promises like this, then reneging because it would take her too long to heal. They at least owe her the surgery.



WTF? They OWE her nothing. She paid nothing for it so she's owed nothing at all. Maybe expenses she incurred to be there. Maybe.

Uggghhhh.



Bullshit… ABC was speculating with a human like a broker speculates with stocks. ABC stood to make substantial monetary rewards by exploiting this person. ABC made a decision based on profitability due to time frame.

Now I would like to see you go in to court and argue that you had a right to breech a promise because you decided it would be to expensive or take to long.

Other than the morality questions if ABC caused a substantial upheaval/change in her life because of promises they made and then did not fulfill they absolutely owe her.



Bullshit.... I can promise to take you to the moon for free today and never in my whole life do it and you got nothing to take me to court on. "But he said!!!!" is not a contract. Especially if you sign a peice of paper that says I can decide not to take you for any reason or no reason at all. You didn't pay me anything to provide this service and your choice to take off work to come claim a prize you didn't have any legally binding promise to get and had not paid for is your own.

You can call me a terrible person and curse my name, but you won't be riding to the moon with me.

ETA: State laws vary but I've never seen anyone win a case by claiming they were promised something for free and didn't get it. I have certainly NEVER seen a company leave themselves hanging wide open by offering a legal contract in exchange for nothing, nor to word the tems in favor of the party accepting what amounts to a gift.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 12:18:50 PM EDT
Can her sister get a makeover now too. Her face has a deadened look to it.

M4-AK
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 12:20:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 12:29:03 PM EDT by Max_Mike]

Originally Posted By Grunteled:


You people have no idea what the "contract" was. I'd have to be born yesderday to think that they had a contract and then in total breach of it cut her performance. I'm certain they had plenty of clauses to state that all the recovery had to take place in a certain time frame and that it all had to be acceptable for airing or it was a non starter.

The idea that her taking off time or hiring a baby sitter represents consideration to them seems to me to be BS. She did not hand them anything other than her appearance, and I'm certain that she did not negotiate the terms of that performance but simply signed what they handed her to sign.



It does represent consideration like it or not


If she thought she was dealing with anything other than snakes she was stupid. If she actually agreed and her family participated in humilating her for tape, then I have no respect or sympathy for any of them.


Irrelevant babble.


I'll remember this legal thread if someone ever promises me a Christmas gift I don't get. That bastard is going to pay now that I know my feelings and emotional truma being made me a contract even if they weren't my terms.


This line clearly shows you don’t understand this or contacts.

If someone ever promises me a Christmas gift only IF I meet conditions ABC and do XYZ… it is not a gift it is a exchange dependent on both parties fulfilling their agreeded to contractual obligations.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 12:26:35 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 12:39:59 PM EDT by Grunteled]

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:

Originally Posted By Grunteled:


You people have no idea what the "contract" was. I'd have to be born yesderday to think that they had a contract and then in total breach of it cut her performance. I'm certain they had plenty of clauses to state that all the recovery had to take place in a certain time frame and that it all had to be acceptable for airing or it was a non starter.

The idea that her taking off time or hiring a baby sitter represents consideration to them seems to me to be BS. She did not hand them anything other than her appearance, and I'm certain that she did not negotiate the terms of that performance but simply signed what they handed her to sign.



It does represent consideration like it or not


If she thought she was dealing with anything other than snakes she was stupid. If she actually agreed and her family participated in humilating her for tape, then I have no respect or sympathy for any of them.


Irrelevant babble.


I'll remember this legal thread if someone ever promises me a Christmas gift I don't get. That bastard is going to pay now that I know my feelings and emotional truma being made me a contract even if they weren't my terms.


This line clearly sows you don’t understand this or contacts.

If someone ever promises me a Christmas gift only IF I meet conditions ABC and do XYZ… it is not a gift it is a exchange dependent on both parties fulfilling their agreeded to contractual obligations.



And so you know the contract she signed says they can't cancel the operation if it does not meet their time table? Cause if so then you are the party babbeling. Your emotional "because it's not nice" post means nothing. If she had a contract with no escape for time or artisitc considerations then she'll win by providing her performance. If they did have an escape (and I'll bet the farm they did) she's owed nothing.

I'll have to check on using time off and baby sitting as consideration. Doesn't make any sense to me as it's not provided to the party you are contracting with.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 12:48:14 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 12:52:33 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 12:56:06 PM EDT by CS223]
They did a casting call at a local mall here for Extreme Makeover. The local producer for our ABC station also handles the advertising accounts. He was by our biz on an advertising call talking about the ordeal. According to him it was the saddest, most digusting collection of human dregs of society that he ever witnessed. Like some zombie scifi movie. Heart breaking and sickening at the same time. Kinda says something about our society when we are willing to exploit someones handicap for profit and entertainment.


ETA

Williams, 30, and her husband, Mike, are raising McGee's two children, along with two kids of their own.


Must not be that ugly, someone hit it at least twice.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 12:53:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Grunteled:

And so you know the contract she signed says they can't cancel the operation if it does not meet their time table? Cause if so then you are the party babbeling. Your emotional "because it's not nice" post means nothing. If she had a contract with no escape for time or artisitc considerations then she'll win by providing her performance. If they did have an escape (and I'll bet the farm they did) she's owed nothing.

I'll have to check on using time off and baby sitting as consideration. Doesn't make any sense to me as it's not provided to the party you are contracting with.



No. Its not babel. Contract law is more complex than that. As I posted earlier, the judge may throw out the escape clauses if he considers the bargaining process unfair. In addition, it is also likely that the contract had a liquidated damages provision and the company figured that they would pay her some nominal fee to get out of the contract. Liquidated damages provisions, however, a routinely thrown out by courts.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 12:53:54 PM EDT
Alright.....

By the rather lengthy definition below it does appear that consideration can be simple inconvience to the party contracting. That conflicts with what we were told in college that the consideration had to change hands (ie performance, money, goods, services) so I'll have to back down on that.

Without seeing what she really signed though we have no way to know if the contract was breached or they simply had an escape and used it. I'd be highly surprised to see that she got anything other than a form-letter style contract to sign and did so.



CONSIDERATION - The inducement, price or motive that causes a party to enter into an agreement or contract.

Something of value that is given in exchange for getting something from another person. For example, rent payments paid to receive the right to rent an apartment.

A compensation which is paid, or all inconvenience suffered by the party from whom it proceeds. Or it is the reason which moves the contracting party to enter into the contract. A cause or occasion meritorious requiring a mutual recompense in deed or in law. A consideration of some sort or other is so absolutely necessary to the forming a good contract that a nudum pactum, or an agreement to do or to pay any thing on one side without any compensation to the other, is totally void in law, and a man cannot be compelled to perform it. But contracts under seal are valid without a consideration or perbaps, more properly speaking, every bond imports in itself a sufficient consideration though none be mentioned. Negotiable instruments, as bills of exchange and promissory notes, carry with them prima facie evidence of consideration.

The consideration must be some benefit to the party by whom the promise is made, or to a third person at his instance; or some detriment sustained at the instance of the party promising by the party in whose favor the promise is made.

Considerations are good when they are for natural love and affection; or valuable when some benefit arises to the party to whom they are made, or inconvenience to the party making them.

They are legal, which are sufficient to support the contract or illegal, which render it void. If the performance be utterly impossible, in fact or in law, the consideration is void.

A mere moral obligation to pay a debt or perform a duty is a sufficient consideration for an express promise, although no legal liability existed at the time of making such promise. But it is to be observed that in such cases there must have been a good or valuable consideration; for example, every one is under a moral obligation to relieve a person in distress, a promise to do so, however, is not binding in law. One is bound to pay a debt which he owes although he has been released; a promise to pay such a debt is obligatory in law on the debtor and can therefore be enforced by action.

In respect of time, a consideration is either: Executed, or Something done before the making of the obligor's promise. In general, an executed consideration is insufficient to support a contract but an executed consideration on request or by some previous duty, or if the debt be continuing at the time, or it is barred by some rule of law, or some provision of a statute as the act of limitation, it is sufficient to maintain an action; Executory, or something to be done after such promise; Concurrent, as in the case of mutual promises, and; A continuing consideration.

When the consideration turns out to be false and fails there is no contract as, for example, if my father by his will gives me all his estate, charged with the payment of a thousand dollars, and I promise to give you my house instead of the legacy to you, and you agree to buy it with the legacy, and before the contract is completed and I make you a deed for the house, I discover that my father made a codicil to his will and by it he revoked the gift to you, I am not bound to complete the contract by making you a deed for my house

Link Posted: 9/20/2005 12:58:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By VoodooChile:
I found a slightly larger version..Lady's got a point....


img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-9/832380/woah.jpg



thanks
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 12:59:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By happycynic:

Originally Posted By Grunteled:

And so you know the contract she signed says they can't cancel the operation if it does not meet their time table? Cause if so then you are the party babbeling. Your emotional "because it's not nice" post means nothing. If she had a contract with no escape for time or artisitc considerations then she'll win by providing her performance. If they did have an escape (and I'll bet the farm they did) she's owed nothing.

I'll have to check on using time off and baby sitting as consideration. Doesn't make any sense to me as it's not provided to the party you are contracting with.



No. Its not babel. Contract law is more complex than that. As I posted earlier, the judge may throw out the escape clauses if he considers the bargaining process unfair. In addition, it is also likely that the contract had a liquidated damages provision and the company figured that they would pay her some nominal fee to get out of the contract. Liquidated damages provisions, however, a routinely thrown out by courts.



So how do contracts (like say an ISP) that are completely one sided get regularly enforced? I have no rights or options under this contract. They can cancel my service tomorrow because they don't like rainy days. I have no option but to find another provider or do without if I don't like the contract I'm supposed to sign.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 1:00:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By anachronism:
I'm on her side. This is bullshit, making promises like this, then reneging because it would take her too long to heal. They at least owe her the surgery.



Me too.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 1:00:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 1:15:16 PM EDT by VoodooChile]
I don't have a dog in this fight but the application and rules are online....have at it boys...keep an eye on that last paragraph

abc.go.com/primetime/ExtremeMakeover/application.html

Section V: Eligibility Requirement, Consents, and Releases


You must be a U.S. citizen.


You must be at least 21 years of age.


You must not be a candidate for public office and must agree not to become one until one year after the initial broadcast of the program in which you appear, if selected as a participant.


You or any of your immediate family members (spouse, ex-spouse, parents, siblings, children) and household members (whether related or not) may not be employees, officers, directors, representatives or agents of New Screen Concepts, New Screen Entertainment, Inc., Lighthearted Entertainment, Greengrass Productions, Inc., American Broadcasting Companies, Inc., The Walt Disney Company, known sponsors of the program or their advertising agencies, any station initially airing the program, and/or their respective parent, subsidiary, or affiliated companies, licensees, partners and assigns.


You must never have been convicted of a felony or misdemeanor, other than a minor traffic violation, and have never had a restraining order or other injunctive relief entered against you. There must not be any outstanding criminal warrants for you.


You must not have appeared in a prime-time television reality/game show series or are not involved in the current production of any such television show.


If selected as a participant you must execute all waivers and release agreements required by the producers or by ABC.


You will need to be available for several days for the Makeover process, as well as approximately four to seven weeks thereafter for recoveries (if needed) and participation in a follow-up Makeover .


You must be in excellent mental and physical health.


You must be willing to submit medical information to the production and submit to a medical examination, psychological examination, and background check.


This is a rolling application process. We will post the deadline on the web site 10 days before we stop accepting applications.


I hereby acknowledge that: (i) I have answered the previous questions honestly and accurately; (ii) I will immediately inform New Screen Entertainment, Inc. ("Producer") if any information I have provided becomes false or incomplete; (iii) if any of the above information is found to be false or incomplete this will be grounds for dismissal from the participant selection process, and/or from the program currently entitled "The Extreme Makeover" (the "Program"), if selected; (iv) even if I meet the above eligibility requirements, Producer has no obligation to interview me, and/or select me as a participant; (v) even if I am selected as a participant, Producer has no obligation to conduct the Program or to display it, even if conducted; (vi) all decisions by Producer concerning selection of the participants are final and not subject to challenge or appeal; and (vii) Producer has no obligation to return any materials submitted by me as part of the application whether or not I am selected as a participant.

I understand that the Program involves an "Extreme Makeover" of the participant which may include, without limitation, cosmetic and/or plastic surgery on the participant. I acknowledge that before participating in the Program, I will consult with my own physician regarding the advisability from a physical and emotional health perspective of my potential participation in the Program. I represent that if I proceed with the participant selection process and am selected to be a participant in the Program, I know of no reason, following consultation with my own physician, why I should not participate in the Program.

By submitting this application I hereby consent to the recording, use and reuse by Producer, Greengrass Productions, Inc. ("Greengrass"), American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. ("ABC"), The Walt Disney Company, and any of their respective licensees, assignees, parents, subsidiaries, or affiliated entities and each of their respective employees, agents, representatives, officers and directors (collectively "Releasees") of my voice, actions, likeness, name, appearance, biographical material, and any information contained in my application to be a participant in the Program or in any materials submitted by me in connection with my application (collectively "Likeness") as edited, altered, or modified by the Releasees, in any and all media now known or hereafter devised, in any and all versions, worldwide in perpetuity, in or in connection with the Program. I agree the Releasees may use all or any part of my Likeness, and may alter or modify it regardless of whether or not I am recognizable. I further agree that Releasees exclusively own all right, title, and interest (including, without limitation, all copyrights) in and to any video that I have provided in connection with my application and any other materials that I have provided or may provide in connection with the Program (the "Materials") including, without limitation, the right to edit, alter or modify the Materials and to use all or part of the Materials and my Likeness in any and all media now known or hereafter devised in any and all versions worldwide, in perpetuity. I further agree that Releasees may use my Likeness and the Materials in connection with any promotion, publicity, marketing or advertisement for the Program. I grant the rights hereunder whether or not I am selected to participate in the Program in any manner whatsoever. I agree to release, defend, indemnify and hold harmless Releasees from any and all claims, actions, lawsuits, liabilities and expenses arising out of or relating to its recording or use of my Likeness and/or the Materials. I agree not to make any claim against Releasees as a result of the recording or use of my Likeness and/or the Materials (including, without limitation, any claim that such use invades any right of privacy and/or publicity). I understand that I will not be paid any money for giving Releasees these rights, or for signing this agreement.

I authorize Producer and its designees to investigate, access and collect information about me, about any of the statements made by me in my application, any supporting documents and any other document that I have signed or do sign in connection with my application to be selected as a participant in the Program, or any other written or oral statements I make in connection therewith. I irrevocably authorize Producer, ABC, Greengrass and their respective designees to secure information about my experiences from my current and former employers, associates, friends, family members, educational institutions, government agencies, credit reporting agencies, and any references I have provided, and I irrevocably authorize such parties to provide information concerning me. I specifically authorize investigation of my employment record, medical record, and government records, including but not limited to my motor vehicle record, civil record, criminal record and consumer report(s). I agree to execute any authorizations, consents and releases requested from me by Producer, ABC and/or Greengrass and their respective designees in connection with their investigation of me. I hereby unconditionally and irrevocably release and forever discharge all such parties and persons from any and all liabilities arising out of or in connection with any such investigation.

I agree to undergo to the extent permitted by law and at the sole discretion of Producer, with no prior notice to me, any physical and mental examinations requested by Producer in connection with my possible selection for and participation in the Program. Such examinations will be conducted by medical personnel of Producer's choosing. I acknowledge that I may not be selected to participate or my participation may be discontinued at any time if in the sole and exclusive discretion of Producer and/or its medical experts the results of such tests indicate that I am not physically or mentally fit to participate in the Program. I understand and agree that any physical and/or mental assistance, examinations and/or sessions I may have with any medical personnel retained by or associated with the Program, Producer and its affiliates, does not create a confidential relationship between myself and such medical personnel. Accordingly, I acknowledge and consent to production doctors, psychologists, and other medical personnel communicating with Producer, ABC and/or Greengrass, and their designated agents any diagnoses, prognoses, medical information and/or opinions regarding me. I hereby waive any physician-patient privilege I may have or that may arise with any physicians, psychologists, health care providers (including both physical and mental health care providers), social workers, health care institutions, insurers, and other individuals and entities as a result of my participation in the selection process and/or the Program, and I authorize the release to Producer, ABC and Greengrass of all records and information, written, verbal, electronic or otherwise, from any of the above persons and/or entities. I agree to sign any authorizations that Producer, ABC, Greengrass or a health care provider deems necessary to facilitate the release of such records and information. Without in any way limiting anything herein, I further hereby release, discharge, relinquish and hold harmless Releasees from any medical care assistance, treatment or services provided to me at any time whether such treatment or services are provided by health care professionals, paramedics, or any other person.

I agree to treat all information and material I receive or acquire as part of my participation in the participant selection process for the Program as strictly confidential and to not disclose any such information to any third party. I specifically acknowledge that the financial value of the Program to Producer, ABC and Greengrass depends on confidentiality and I agree to be responsible for any and all damages, including consequential damages that Producer and/or any of the Releasees may suffer if I breach this confidentiality provision.

I agree to release, defend, indemnify and hold harmless the Releasees and all media and production companies affiliated with or associated with the production, promotion and/or broadcast of the Program and their respective employees, agents, officers and directors from and against any and all claims, actions, lawsuits, liabilities and expenses arising from or relating to: (a) my participation in the Program including, without limitation, the participant selection process, (b) the use of my Likeness and/or the Materials, (c) any of my acts or statements relating to or in connection with the Program; and (d) any breach of my representations or warranties herein. I understand and agree that all rights under Section 1542 of the California Civil Code and any similar law of any state or U.S. territory, any similar federal law, or any similar common law or principle of similar effect, are hereby expressly waived. I acknowledge and understand that said section reads as follows: "1542. Certain claims not affected by general release. A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his favor at the tims of executing the release, which if known by him must have materially affected his settlement with the debtor." I acknowledge that I may hereafter discover claims in addition to the ones released herein, and I hereby release Releasees for any such unknown or unsuspected claims.

I acknowledge that in the event of a breach of this Consent and Release by Producer or any third party, the damage, if any, caused me will not be irreparable or otherwise sufficient to entitle me to seek injunctive or other equitable relief. I acknowledge that my rights and remedies in any such event will be strictly limited to the right, if any, to recover damages in an action at law, and I acknowledge and agree that I will not have the right to rescind this Release or any of Releasees' rights hereunder, nor the right to enjoin the production, exhibition or other exploitation of the Program, or any subsidiary or allied rights with respect thereto, or any other results and proceeds hereunder.

I have read, understand, and agree with the foregoing.


Link Posted: 9/20/2005 1:02:37 PM EDT
Thats fucked up, I hope she gets something, you cant just dick around people like that.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 1:08:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 1:12:29 PM EDT by sirensong]

Originally Posted By vanilla_gorilla:
So you're saying she deserves something because she was promised something for free and didn't get it??





that's exactly what i'm saying. whatever happened to the idea that one's word was one's bond?

you break your word, you deserve the consequences.

[edit: nevermind--just read the release. they're legally indemnified, and she shouldn't have signed.]
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top