Paparazzo sues Woody Harrelson for $2.5 million

[Amerigo Vespucci]

LOS ANGELES — Woody Harrelson has been sued for $2.5 million by a paparazzo who accused the actor of assaulting him and breaking his video camera two years ago.

According to a lawsuit filed Friday in Los Angeles Superior Court, Josh Levine was filming Harrelson in Hollywood late one night in June 2006. He alleges the Academy Award-nominated actor choked him, broke his video camera and ordered his bodyguard to attack him.

Levine's suit says he still has mental, physical and emotional pain from the encounter. He is also suing the unidentified bodyguard.

Harrelson's publicist could not immediately be reached for comment.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/22/woody-harrelson-sued-for_n_108484.html

[DarkTirade]

1. Hmm... if you can sue someone for mental and emotional pain from an encounter like that...

does that mean that every celebrity can now sue annoying paparazzo for such things? :evilgrin:

[Amerigo Vespucci]

2. I wonder how they calculate the dollar value of mental and emotional pain

If I could just get access to the raw data, then I could put myself in the path of a paparazzo each month, right before the rent is due, and know exactly how much he'd need to mess with me in order to make my landlord happy.

Remember this one?

Burger King denies condom found in Whopper

Man files suit after he claims he bit into prophylactic in his hamburger

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22217836/

Dec. 12, 2007

RUTLAND, Vt. - The owner of a Burger King franchise says there's no merit to a man's claim that he bit into an unwrapped condom while eating a sandwich he bought there.

Franchise owner Carrols Corp. of Syracuse, N.Y., said it "is confident that no Carrols employee placed any foreign object" on Van Miguel Hartless' food, the company said in a statement released Tuesday.

Hartless, 24, of Fair Haven, claims in a lawsuit that he bought a Southwestern Whopper at the restaurant in Rutland on June 18 and made the discovery when he got home and started eating it. The suit, filed last month, seeks damages for pain and suffering, emotional duress and medical expenses.

The company said it plans to file a formal response to the lawsuit soon.

"We were certain in June that there was no validity to the claim," said Joseph Zirkman, vice president and general counsel of Carrols Corp. "We're doing what we can to investigate and make sure the truth comes out."

Burger King Corp. released a statement backing Carrols.

"We have a long-term relationship with this franchisee and have faith in the investigation they performed in June," the statement reads.

Alfred Burns, a sanitarian supervisor for Vermont's Department of Health, said state investigators "found nothing wrong in the restaurant at that time as far as tampering and contamination are concerned," he said.

But he said investigators couldn't rule out the possibility that someone had placed a condom in the sandwich.

Hartless, a student at Green Mountain College in Poultney, said he kept the sandwich and the condom as evidence.

"It was never my intention to file a lawsuit in the first place," he said. "I just wanted the assurance that they would pay my medical bills if something happened to me."

:spray: