nm

I know Walker is probably scorned (can we blame her?) but reading this quickly, it does seem like she has a viable legal claim as well. We dont know what type of relationship she had w/ Lo but it can possibly be breach of fiduciary duty, and the fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud (as listed) and the other equitble reliefs like detrimental reliance.


Truth is, while it is common that our SAs charge/send, or we let our spouses/families use our cards/accounts, it is still not technically "right". When it accumulates to this amount and degree, it is esp more outrageous (i have a feeling a charge without authority to this degree goes into the fraud element). Further, if NM has a return policy then they should respond as to why they refuse to accept returns. I am guessing their lawyers will answer for this in their papers. NM is rep by Bryan Cave, a very good law firm.

So her husband failed on three accounts

1. Having an affair with some homewrecker

2. buying her gifts when she was not even conscious to acknowledge them

3. Buying her items she doesn't even like

Quote:

She learned of her husband's relationship with Lo a few months later while engaged in divorce proceedings, Ticer said.

But this doesn't really seem like a woman scorned to me, especially when he was on his way out. I guess she just doesn't want to pay for his carelessness. KWIM?

Originally Posted by blah956

i went to this location yesterday hoping to see the lady :lol:

at Favi Lo...she was getting Lo alright.

Quote:

DALLAS (CN) - A woman who says she spent more than $1 million at Neiman Marcus while its sales associate was cavorting with her husband filed a motion for summary judgment. Patricia Walker, of Garland, sued the Dallas-based luxury retailer and employee Favi Lo in 2010 for fraud, conspiracy and breach of fiduciary duty. Walker said Lo was her personal shopper for several years and that she would pay the resulting bills from "substantial purchases." "Lo and Walker had a close personal relationship of trust and confidence," according to the complaint in Dallas County Court. "Unbeknownst to Walker, Lo was carrying an extramarital relationship with Walker's spouse, Bobby Tennison. Lo was making large sales to Tennison. Lo and Tennison, in fact, conspired on these purchases to both enable Tennison to live a lavish lifestyle that he could not afford on his own and permit Lo to receive large commissions and/or wages." Walker says she wants to return all of her Neiman purchases, but that the retailer has refused, in spite of its long-standing, generous return policy. After Lo and Neiman Marcus asserted seven affirmative defenses, Walker filed a motion for a no-evidence summary judgment. "Defendants' nonsensical response is no evidence that there are any specific acts by Walker that caused or contributed to Walker's alleged injuries," according to the Nov. 7 motion authored by attorney Mark Ticer. "Defendants have no evidence that would satisfy any basis that one, some, or all of plaintiff's own acts or ommissions caused her injuries. "Defendants have not identified one single act connected to any of Walker's injuries or damages that would preclude her recovery in whole or in part," Ticer added. The seven-page motion attacks each affirmative defenses, which claim that Walker waived her right to return the merchandise because she used her Neiman account to make the purchases. "There is no evidence of any intent of relinquishment of a known right or any demonstration of intentional conduct that is inconsistent with claiming a known right," Ticer wrote. A justification defense furthermore does not apply because there is no evidence Neiman has a privilege to interfere existing in the parties' contracts, he added. Judge Ken Molberg is presiding over the case.

http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/11/13/52211.htm

Case filing for the lawyers here:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/11/13/neiman.pdf

Echoes, thanks for the follow up. I am interested to see Judge Molberg's take on this case. Below are pix of Mrs. Walker and Ms. Lo, apparently the news made it all the way to UK.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...g-husband.html

I recognize Favi. I forgot all about this story, I was at NorthPark NM today! lol!
I haven't worked with her, nor did I see her today. But I recognize her face.

Looks to me like the media is having a good time with the spin on the case with the SA being the mistress. Can't imagine why NM didn't take the returns in 2010. Was that ever publicized? As someone posted, even if she waited 7 years, they should take the return.

Seems the woman is fighting fraud, or at least some sort of breach of contract/agreement regarding the return policy, in ridiculously muddy circumstances.

As for firing the SA, why would they? She did her job and sold a bunch of stuff.

Originally Posted by No Cute

Looks to me like the media is having a good time with the spin on the case with the SA being the mistress. Can't imagine why NM didn't take the returns in 2010. Was that ever publicized? As someone posted, even if she waited 7 years, they should take the return. Seems the woman is fighting fraud, or at least some sort of breach of contract/agreement regarding the return policy, in ridiculously muddy circumstances. As for firing the SA, why would they? She did her job and sold a bunch of stuff.

The SA abused her position. She showed very poor judgment and her actions were unethical.
Was she fired?

Originally Posted by limom

The SA abused her position. She showed very poor judgment and her actions were unethical. Was she fired?

I agree.

Originally Posted by Swanky Mama Of Three

I recognize Favi. I forgot all about this story, I was at NorthPark NM today! lol! I haven't worked with her, nor did I see her today. But I recognize her face.

i knew some of PFer in Dallas area will recognize the face

I know this is old, but, I see Walkers point. The sales lady was not just doing her job! This is about fraud and conspiracy, not just the affair, or the return policy, etc.

It was fraudulent and unethical on the SAs part.... For the charges....and the husbands part too. Regardless of the affair. The affair just helps you put it all together...

Wow! Just read more about this case.

Btw there is an article about it, they called it "A Lo Blow"! Talk about double meaning....

Anyway, interesting.... What gets me is, she was in a hospital bed while all these things were charged to her card. She did not need or want the items. Favi took advantage of that knowledge and earned very large commissions.

Btw there was a funny quote by Gracie Allen: "I wish George would cheat again... I really need a new centerpiece". Lol!!

Originally Posted by gratefull

Wow! Just read more about this case. Btw there is an article about it, they called it "A Lo Blow"! Talk about double meaning.... Anyway, interesting.... What gets me is, she was in a hospital bed while all these things were charged to her card. She did not need or want the items. Favi took advantage of that knowledge and earned very large commissions. Btw there was a funny quote by Gracie Allen: "I wish George would cheat again... I really need a new centerpiece". Lol!!

"A Lo Blow" I always thought the Gracie Allen quote was about a necklace or the matching earrings? (Supposedly, George Burns only once cheated, early in their marriage, and always regretted the one-night-stand. He thought Gracie didn't know about it, but bought her a diamond necklace (or was it earrings?) out of guilt. Gracie said nothing for years. At dinner with friends, someone admired her jewelry. She thanked them, saying," Yes, I wish George would cheat on me again, so I could get the matching [earrings? Necklace?]!"

Originally Posted by Ratnapur

"A Lo Blow" I always thought the Gracie Allen quote was about a necklace or the matching earrings? (Supposedly, George Burns only once cheated, early in their marriage, and always regretted the one-night-stand. He thought Gracie didn't know about it, but bought her a diamond necklace (or was it earrings?) out of guilt. Gracie said nothing for years. At dinner with friends, someone admired her jewelry. She thanked them, saying," Yes, I wish George would cheat on me again, so I could get the matching [earrings? Necklace?]!"

...Awesome!! LOL! Thanks for the laugh!!!
you are prob. right.... the Gracie thing is hilarious.... I read it that way about the centerpiece - but come to think of it, think I've heard it too the way you stated. I stand corrected
...and yeah, the Lo comment.... sad but funny double entendre (hmm, actually triple entendre)