Judge Tosses Blonde’s Suit Claiming Wrong Hair Dye Ruined her Social Life

Trials & Litigation

Judge Tosses Blonde’s Suit Claiming Wrong Hair Dye Ruined her Social Life

Posted Oct 8, 2008, 11:24 am CST
By Debra Cassens Weiss

A Connecticut judge has refused to get tangled up in a woman’s suit claiming a switched tube of hair dye turned her blonde hair brown, wreaking havoc on her social life.

Judge Richard Gilardi of Bridgeport said the root of the problem with the lawsuit was a lack of evidence showing that L'Oreal was negligent, the Connecticut Post reports.

The woman, Charlotte Feeney, had claimed she bought a tube of blonde hair color to touch up her naturally blonde hair, but brown dye was apparently put into the blonde box, the story says.

"I can never go back to my natural blonde hair," Feeney stated. "I feel fake about that. Also blondes do get more attention than brunettes. Of course, emotionally, I miss that."

She contends the change in hair color caused anxiety and depression that she treated with anti-depressants.

Comments

Report Abuse

Posted by Ellen Barshevsky - 1 month, 1 week, 5 days, 7 hours ago

I already comented on this. What hapened to my coment?

Anyway, I feel bad for this woman. I would never color my hair, but this woman has been put down by the big company for their mistakes.

WHY would she sue if the company was not Guilty?

I think there may be something more going on here. She is being discriminated against because she is a WOMAN trying to look good, and they are snikering at her because she is a blond woman?

That is WRONG and DISCRIMINATORY. I vote to reopen this case.
Posted by Associate - 1 month, 1 week, 5 days, 37 minutes ago

Ellen, in case you haven’t noticed, this isn’t up for a vote. ;)
Posted by Law student - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 15 hours, 11 minutes ago

Ellen, I can’t tell if you’re having a bit of a joke with us, but treating your comment as serious, I can find at least one scenario that is more likely than negligence, which is that a mischievous shopper switched tubes and boxes as joke, or that a careless shopper did so after examining the tubes outside the box.

My guess is that a clever defense attorney - and possibly this judge - could find a dozen more alternative theories that would make the evidentiary hurdle pretty tough to leap.
Posted by JME - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 15 hours, 10 minutes ago

I like that comment about the root of the problem. I wonder, doesn’t hair grow out? Seems that blonde will come again. Maybe she got laughed at when some guy discovered she was brown on top and blonde below? My son dyed his hair, naturally brown, to blonde. I refer to him as artificially stupid. and on to Ellen’s note - Haven’t you noticed? Lots of people sue when the company is not guilty! It’s called “I want a bigger piece of your pie! It isn’t fair you have more than me, even though I didn’t work for it!“ Why do you think people hate lawyers? its because they only see the stupid lawsuits, not the stupid people that pushed the attorney into filing the suit!
Posted by JJH - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 13 hours, 7 minutes ago

Here’s what the plaintiff said according to the Connecticut Post: “I was mentally and physically in shock,“ Feeney states in court documents. “I was sick to my stomach, I had headaches, I don’t like myself, I stay home more than ever in my life, I wear hats most of the time.“ This quote makes me sick to my stomach. Dye your hair back and get over it! It’s outrageous that L’Oreal had to pay money to defend this claim.
Posted by Willem DeDonis - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 12 hours, 43 minutes ago

JJH, very interesting. We should now perhaps to stop bashing Ellen. She now is beginning to sound like a nuclear scientist by comparison, no?
Posted by Dan K. - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 12 hours, 37 minutes ago

Step 1: Get buzz cut
Step 2: Hang out in punk bars until hair grows back out
Step 3: Move on with life and have funny story to tell.
Posted by Bill - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 12 hours, 29 minutes ago

Ellen, you are a hoot. I just keep telling myself you can’t possibly be for real. You are a law student? Wow.

The plaintiff here is an idiot. Everybody wants to sue, sue, sue for any little “bad” thing or inconvenience. She dyed her hair brown; she can dye it blonde again.

Grow up, suck it up, get over it people.
Posted by Rick Rutledge - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 11 hours, 27 minutes ago

For less than an hour of her attorney’s time to file a pleading, she could have hired a competent colorist to “restore” her “natural” blonde sufficiently that any regrowth would be indiscernible, and the only people who ever knew it had been brown would be the few people she saw between doing her botch job and going to her “urgent” professional appointment. (If you’re going to take on applying chemicals to your own body, you owe yourself a standard of care that *at least* includes reading the label on the *tube* before proceeding. Can you say “contributory or comparative negligence”?)

If her hair color was natural, and if it was *so* important to her, why did she not have it professionally “touched up”?

Ellen, do you not realize the judge would have laughed *more* if a man had brought such a suit?

(And by extension of your logic, we can help cope with the current financial crisis cities and counties face from loss of tax revenue by eliminating the office of the Public Defender, since a lawsuit leads to an unrebuttable presumption of guilt. By extension, it would seem: if arrest, then guilt, thus conviction. Shucks, with that logic, we could even get rid of the DA, and just let the police collect the criminals. Then, of course, we wouldn’t need the lawyers, either.)
Posted by legally blonde - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 11 hours, 13 minutes ago

Any natural or unnatual blonde knows the essential rule of hair care which is that you go to a stylist. Also,the lady who brought the lawsuit is a liar. Natural blondes don’t color their hair-they use the sun to highlight it. If her hair was naturally blonde then she wouldnt be using box bleach. And, if she had money then she would have gone to a stylist. Trust me, I’m a self-proclaimed expert on this! Case dismissed.
Posted by Gatsby - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 11 hours, 6 minutes ago

Clearly, this woman is a blond. She’s too stupid to know that hair dye is NOT permanent, so her “natural” blond color would come back…or is she wanted a more expeditious solution to her “problem,“ she could’ve just dyed her hair back to blonde. Wow! What a dumb broad.
Posted by mark - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 11 hours, 5 minutes ago

Ellen, your comments on this and other stories are fantastic. I am most entertained. Keep writing!
Posted by Robin - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 10 hours, 56 minutes ago

Kudos to the writer of this article. I love your phrasing “tangled up in” and “the root of the problem” . Very funny!
Posted by i hate ellen barshitsky - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 10 hours, 55 minutes ago

Comment removed by moderator.
Posted by Southern Atty - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 10 hours, 53 minutes ago

Ellen! your comment “why would she sue if the company was not guilty?“ is very naive. Are you serious? All tattorneys, or anyone associated with the justice system knows the people sue becuase people sue, not because anyone is guilty. Surely you can’t be serious.
Posted by Southern Atty - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 10 hours, 52 minutes ago

oops, attorneys (not tattorneys, that would be an attorney with a tatoo, maybe) LOL
Posted by Rick Rutledge - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 10 hours, 45 minutes ago

(Not to mention that civil suits find liability, not guilt. I assumed a bit of liberty on that point in order to parallel Ms. B’s initial comments.)
Posted by NativeNewYorker - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 10 hours, 36 minutes ago

If the dyed blonde’s case had gone forward, then I would have considered suing Juniors for the damage their cheesecake has done to my social life. However, when I offer to pay the tab, everyone loves me. And I have never been a blonde.
Posted by MV_Esq. - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 10 hours, 35 minutes ago

I wonder if she would have had more luck if she took her case in front of the memorable “dry-cleaner lost my pants!“ judge (yes, I know he was an ALJ, but still, it’s a funny thought).

Maybe they should date.
Posted by Ron Kaplan - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 10 hours, 28 minutes ago

This woman would likely have a suit under her state’s UCC Art 2, § 2-314 for breach of an implied warranty of merchantability and § 2-315 for breach of the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose. If it is stated the hair dye is “Blonde,” then this is an express warranty that cannot be disclaimed once made. It would seem appropriate that if the product was mislabeled and this woman suffered harm from such, that could certainly be foreseeable where she could have been enormously embarrassed by this incident, that under § 2-715, she is entitled to consequential and incidental damages. It was her mistake to go in on an emotional distress claim rather than a contract action.
Posted by Rick Rutledge - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 10 hours, 18 minutes ago

The issue, it seems, was not a problem with the dye, per se. Rather, a tube of brown dye was put in a box labeled as blond. Thus, had she looked at the tube before applying it, the “damage” would never have occurred.
Posted by JerseyGirl Esq. - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 9 hours, 53 minutes ago

Ahem, excuse me, but “touch up her naturally blonde hair”? Sorry, never heard that one before. And here I always thought touch ups were what people with dyed hair did. By the way, I’ve got this amazing beach front property in West Virginia I’d like to sell you.
Posted by Heidi O - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 9 hours, 42 minutes ago

As a brunette who is perfectly happy with the original color of my hair (let’s not discuss the gray that is taking over), I’m highly offended that someone would find being a brunette so ruinous to her self-esteem. Do I have a cause of action against her for negligent infliction of emotional distress? Am I a protected class? Just a few musings before my brain awakens for the day.

Now, everyone go back to work!
Posted by Ram Rod Stiffington - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 9 hours, 38 minutes ago

I am GUILTY of lovin ellYn.
Posted by GirlLawyer - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 9 hours, 21 minutes ago

The brunette female lawyers in my firm are mobilizing as we speak to protest the fact that the blondes clearly get more attention than we do. The plaintiff’s comment “Emotionally, I miss that” made me laugh so hard, I nearly spit out my coffee!
Posted by legally blonde 2 - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 8 hours, 25 minutes ago

Maybe she is a darker dirty blonde and prefers to be platinum (like me) a much easier and MUCH cheaper thing to do at home then at a salon (I have super short hair and its a difference between $8 and $100 for me). Even my hairstylist recommends “touching up” at home to stop me from having to spend close to a hundred dollars every seven weeks. Though I agree with legally blonde above that true blondes don’t need to “touch up” with artificial dyes. Second, you can not “dye” your hair from brunette to blonde you “bleach” it much more damaging and harsh and dangerous and expensive then simply buying another blonde home hairkit. Plus dyed hair does not bleach as well as natural she would more likely end up with fried orange brassy hair. A truely horrid thing for any blonde natural or otherwise. Also to the brunette that felt offended I’m sorry but how would you like it you suddenlly and accidently became a blonde. It’s not that she’s a brunnette that’s so offensive but that fact that it not her natural or usual color. Having had bad dye jobs their not as easy to erase as some would think. All this said was it worh suin gover probably not but litigous clients keep us in business so stop whining. Why not blame the lawyer (I’m sure a blonde) who brought the claim to court.
Posted by R - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 7 hours, 58 minutes ago

I’m surprised and disappointed that no one has attempted to work the movie title “Legally Blonde” into this story.
Posted by Rebekkah Boxt - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 7 hours, 23 minutes ago

THAT is the funniest sh*t I’ve heard all week! And I’m a funny person…really:)
Posted by Heather - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 7 hours, 15 minutes ago

This is a ridiculous story and even worse lawsuit. What a waste of time and effort by everyone involved (which evidently now includes me for commenting on this article).

I’m sure the Plaintiff was upset, but there is no way to prove the dye was the manufacturer’s fault after going thru so many other hands…and…didnt’ she notice it was the wrong color when she applied it…and…by the way, what are her damages? This is another example of why people hate lawyers…bad judgment by one ruins it for everyone else. I don’t care how “litigous” clients are, it is our business to know the difference between a legitimate claim and a frivolous one. The attorney who filed this lawsuit isn’t doing any of us a favor.
Posted by sb - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 6 hours, 46 minutes ago

This story gives me an idea—or at least it would have, if the plaintiff had succeeded. I am going to sue my mother for giving me the gene that is making all my hair fall out. That, my friends, is a real damper on the social life.

Oh, wait, better yet, maybe I should sue my wife because she won’t let me go out with blonde women—that’s a damper on my social life, too.
Posted by sb - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 6 hours, 40 minutes ago

In defense of Ms. Feeney, you can’t just “dye” hair back blond; once it’s been dyed, if you try to bleach it it will turn funny colors. Her only choice is to allow it to grow out—which, depending on her hair length, will take several months or, possibly, years.

It appears, aside from the humorous undertone of the title, that the judge dismissed the case because there was no evidence to show that L’Oreal actually switched the boxes. Even so, whether the box was open or not, the tube is clearly marked as to color, and the color of the stuff coming out of the tube is a pretty good indicator of what color it will turn your hair.
Posted by The boyfriend - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 6 hours, 20 minutes ago

I am never consulted on beauty and hygiene issues.
Posted by A.H. - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 5 hours, 40 minutes ago

I’ve had my hair every color under the sun and at one point wanted to go from a very dark (dyed) brown to light blonde. An excellent hairstylist and some patience was all I needed. No funny colors, no brassy oranges, and no hair breaking off or falling out. It can and has been done!

Also, when the first few squirts of dye came out of the tube and she rubbed them onto her hair, didn’t she notice something was a bit different than in the past? Like that the dye was turning her hair brown? It’s hard for me to believe that one could dye their entire head of hair before noticing that they’d chosen the wrong color…
Posted by Blonde Guy - 1 month, 1 week, 4 days, 5 hours, 18 minutes ago

What is she supposed to do with the Suit?
Does it match her new hair color?
Posted by just the facts, ma'am - 1 month, 1 week, 3 days, 19 hours, 23 minutes ago

Call me cynical, but the idea that the wrong dye was in the wrong tube in the wrong box seems a little far-fetched. Could it be that the woman just bought and used the wrong product? You think the store receipt actually says “L’Oreal Blonde hair dye”? Even in Connecticut, I’m surprised she found a lawyer to take this case.
Posted by Al Tidom - 1 month, 1 week, 3 days, 2 hours, 54 minutes ago

What difference does this make? One woman upset that she looks ugly? I am certain she was no Kristie Brienkley before hand; am I wrong? If she was plain before the case should be dismissed. Blonde/Brunette, if you are a dog, what difference does it make in the end? Let’s move on.
Posted by Justin - 1 month, 1 week, 1 day, 9 hours, 43 minutes ago

The Plaintiff’s attorney should be ashamed of himself or herself. As a Plaintiff’s attorney, it’s hard enough to convince juries to award a plaintiff appropriate damages due to the false propoganda fed to them regarding “frivolous” lawsuits. Unless I’m missing something here, to take in and file this case is absurd. Thank goodness for the judiciary’s ability to sort through this garbage, and, yes, the judiciary is just fine without the legislature stepping in for “reform.“
Posted by Eliyahu - 1 month, 1 week, 1 day, 8 hours, 46 minutes ago

At the risk of making a blonde joke… isn’t this woman aware that hair grown out? Her comment of “I can never go back to my natural blonde hair” makes no sense at all unless the manufacturer has secretly marketed a product which modifies the genes controlling hair color (an idea which makes no sense at all from the business model standpoint, as customers would use it once and never need it again…). Definitely a silly lawsuit.
Posted by Eliyahu - 1 month, 1 week, 1 day, 8 hours, 45 minutes ago

Oops… make that “...hair grows out?“ My bad.
Posted by Dumb Blondie... - 1 month, 6 days, 54 minutes ago

Ok so if her hair was naturally blonde then why is she making it even blonder? I mean touching up… If your hair is really blonde you DON’T need touching up.
Posted by Outraged - 1 month, 4 days, 8 hours, 27 minutes ago

This is a travesty of justice. Rumor has it that Ralph Nader will suspend his presidential campaign to handle the appeal.

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

ABA Journal - Law News Now

Trials & Litigation