Check out who made the list!
The post Top 10 Celebrity Legal Battles of 2016 appeared first on Law Street.
]]>With great fame comes great…er chances of being sued. Nobody knows this fact better than celebrities, and 2016 was no different. This past year we saw some of our most beloved stars entangled in celebrity court battles ranging from the bizarre to the just plain wrong. For the sake of nostalgia, here are our picks for the top celebrity legal battles of 2016!
10. Lindsey Lohan Loses to Grand Theft Auto
Lindsey Lohan suing @RockstarGames over Grand Theft Auto 5 character pic.twitter.com/5TPQpDnVRL
— RushLimpCall (@rushlimpcall) October 11, 2014
Actress Lindsey Lohan was convinced Grand Theft Auto V illegally used her likeness when creating its infamous red bikini girl, Lacey Jonas. As a result, she sued the game’s makers back in 2014, but it wasn’t until 2016 that her case was eventually dismissed. The overall judgement concluded:
[They are depictions] not of Lohan herself, but merely the avatar in the game that Lohan claims is a depiction of her.
Even if we accept plaintiffs’ contentions that the video game depictions are close enough to be considered representations of the respective plaintiffs, plaintiffs’ claims should be dismissed because this video game does not fall under the statutory definitions of ‘advertising’ or ‘trade’.
Better luck next time LiLo.
Read: Lindsay Lohan’s Lawsuit Against “Grand Theft Auto V” Will Proceed
The post Top 10 Celebrity Legal Battles of 2016 appeared first on Law Street.
]]>Her ex is behind the suit.
The post Sofia Vergara Sued by Her Own Frozen Embryos appeared first on Law Street.
]]>When actress Sofia Vergara and businessman Nick Loeb were engaged, they created and froze embryos, planning to use a surrogate to have a child. But they split up in 2014, and since then, a legal battle has ensued over the frozen embryos. Loeb wants to use one of those embryos to have a baby despite Vergara’s opposition. And allegedly the reason why they split up was because he wanted kids and she didn’t. A legal contract they signed when they were still together made it clear that the embryos could only be used if both parties consented. But it didn’t specify what would happen if they split up, which is why in May of 2015 Loeb sued Vergara for the right to have his own baby.
Now, Loeb is using a different tactic. He filed a lawsuit on “behalf” of the frozen embryos, which are named Emma and Isabella (yes, they already have names). Loeb wants full custody and the chance to implant them in a surrogate. He contends that they have the right to live and to benefit from a trust fund that Loeb set up for them to fund their future education and health care costs. This sounds like a very bizarre case, and like Vergara says, it’s not ideal to bring their mutual embryos to life considering the couple is separated and she is now married to actor Joe Manganiello. But considering the suit was filed in Louisiana, a very pro-life state, it’s not unfathomable that Loeb gets his way.
STRONG CONTENDER FOR THE STRANGEST HEADLINE YOU’LL SEE TODAY: “Sofía Vergara sued by her own embryos” https://t.co/M83TIVe4gj
— Jon Manuel (@JonManuel) December 7, 2016
If that happens, he would get full custody and Vergara would have no parental rights. Loeb has also previously argued that it’s unfair that women can bring children into the world even if the man objects. “Shouldn’t a man who is willing to take on all parental responsibilities be similarly entitled to bring his embryos to term even if the woman objects?” he wrote in an op-ed in 2015. Quoting religious beliefs about the sanctity of life, he claimed that the embryos should be seen as lives rather than property. He wrote that he has dreamt of being a parent his whole life, but that during their relationship it became apparent that it was not a priority for Vergara, who already has a 22-year-old son from an earlier relationship.
According to her lawyer, Vergara wants the embryos to stay frozen, as she is Catholic and could not let them be destroyed. She claims that Loeb just wants to take advantage of her celebrity status to promote himself. Loeb’s claims that he truly wants children and that he believes that keeping their embryos “frozen forever is tantamount to killing them.” No matter who is right, the case is unusual, and it could be precedent-setting.
The post Sofia Vergara Sued by Her Own Frozen Embryos appeared first on Law Street.
]]>Actress ordered to pay for baby, despite divorce.
The post Sorry Sherri Shepherd, But You Can’t Renege Your Baby’s Surrogacy appeared first on Law Street.
]]>
A Pennsylvania appeals court has found television personality Sherri Shepherd legally responsible for a child born to a surrogate that she and her ex-husband hired before they divorced. According to USA Today, the former actress must now continue to pay $4,100 a month in child support to her ex-husband Lamar Sally for little Lamar Jr.
Sherri Shepherd Loses Appeal, Must Pay Child Support to Ex-Husband Lamar Sally https://t.co/6pp8cNwPB0 pic.twitter.com/M6LOtP7AcD
— B. Scott (@lovebscott) November 24, 2015
The couple separated in May 2014, but before they split they had already hired a surrogate to have their baby using Sally’s sperm and an egg donor. It was during the surrogate’s second trimester that Shepherd voiced she’d had a change of heart due to her struggling marriage, despite already paying more than $100,000 for the woman to carry the child.
But seeing as the surrogate was already pregnant, there was no going back. The woman eventually gave birth to the child in August, and Sally, who paid an additional $5,000 toward the surrogate’s cost, was awarded full custody. Yet the writer and substitute teacher still believed Shepherd, who has no DNA link to the baby, should financially support the child.
To make things even more complicated the surrogate was named as Lamar Jr.’s mother on the birth certificate, before it was changed to list Shepherd. The former View host had sought to have her name removed from the new birth certificate and have her surrogacy contract voided before the judge ruled against her.
Either way you look at it, this case is pretty sad. No one likes to hear that someone doesn’t want a baby, but the fact that Shepherd has no biological ties to the child makes this case even more interesting. Ultimately it just goes to show you that once you sign the contract, the baby is yours.
In April, “Modern Family” actress Sofia Vergara suffered similar surrogacy scrutiny after her former fiancé Nick Loeb petitioned the courts to save Vergara’s frozen embryos fertilized with his sperm, so that he could one day use a surrogate to birth them. Many found the matter, which still isn’t resolved, to be creepy, but it just goes to show you that we’re still trying to iron out the legal and moral intricacies of this non-conventional birthing method as it becomes more and more popular.
Hopefully in the case of Shepherd and Sally, the pair can put their differences aside for sake of the baby.
The post Sorry Sherri Shepherd, But You Can’t Renege Your Baby’s Surrogacy appeared first on Law Street.
]]>Hollywood star Sofia Vergara is in a battle with her ex over their frozen embryos.
The post True Hollywood Story: Embryo Edition appeared first on Law Street.
]]>Sofia Vergara’s ex fiancé, Nick Loeb, is suing her for the rights to their frozen embryos.
Before the actress and Loeb separated they went through the process of medically creating and freezing embryos with the intention of using a surrogate to bring one or more of those embryos to term.
During this process, the couple decided to split up and a biological child was never brought into the world.
Vergara has since moved on and is now engaged to actor Joe Manganiello. Loeb, on the other hand, has publicly lobbied to regain ownership of the frozen embryos that were created while he was in a relationship with Vergara. He intends on using a surrogate to bring the embryo to term; however, Vergara does not want the embryo to result in a child. According to Loeb:
We signed a form stating that any embryos created through the process could be brought to term only with both parties’ consent. The form did not specify–as California law requires–what would happen if we separated. I am asking to have it voided.”
Loeb, creator of the Crunchy Condiment Company, has used his ex-fiance’s notoriety to catapult his own case into the pop-culture stratosphere. His main argument for why he should be allowed the rights to the embryos he made with his ex? Women have the power to bring a pregnancy to term even if the man objects, so he should be allowed to bring his unborn child into the world and raise it as he sees fit.*
(*Probably a flawed argument, considering most natural pregnancies are not preceded by legally binding contracts.)
But what happens if a couple warring over embryonic rights does not have any star power?
The topic of frozen embryo ownership isn’t just a celebrity issue. In the United States alone, 600,000 eggs are frozen every year. If freezing eggs is such a common practice, shouldn’t contracts regarding legal rights to frozen eggs be pretty standard? In America…not exactly.
Consider our British brothers and sisters who have fairly concrete laws regarding the process of freezing eggs:
In the U.K. for a couple to go through such treatment, they’d have to sign all the consent forms. If the couple split up, if one party withdraws the consent, the other party can’t use it at all.
In other words, if Vergara and Loeb were having this squabble in England, chances are that Loeb’s request to void the contracts would not be granted. Perhaps the realm of embryonic rights would become less of a gray area if the United States were to adopt the U.K.’s policy wherein consent must unequivocally come from both parties.
The post True Hollywood Story: Embryo Edition appeared first on Law Street.
]]>