one of the comments said it perfectly.

If the store didn't offer her credit, they would have been charged with discrimination and Oprah would have used her powers to drag the store down until they paid her off.

It is similar to the bank mortgage problem. Banks were harassed by the government and by various organizations such as the infamous ACORN into giving loans to people who couldn't afford them since it was deemed unamerican to deny someone the chance to purchase a home. This was doubly true when it disportionately affected minorites. Banks were forced to give out loans and now they (and we) are paying the price.

Of course that is just one of the 12,451,707 reasons for the so-called 'crisis'.

Also as commented in the above article, can you imagine how difficult it would be to get a loan or any sort of credit if lawsuits such as this were successful?

Think what else this logic would work on.
You have a problem with drinking or cigarettes or food? Sue the stores that sell the products.

You steal something? Sue the stores for displaying the stuff out in the open.

You're getting divorced because you were cheating on your spouse? Sue your spouse saying you don't have to give them anything because if they hadn't married you, you wouldn't have had to get a divorce.

etc, etc, etc,


Responsibility. Some people need to learn it.

i think people should stop filing frivilous lawsuits.
it'll stop wasting money and our time reading about them.

"In a separate incident dating to 2002, Lee was ordered by the court to pay Valentina a lump sum of $35,000, then make monthly payments of $5,000 until another past-due bill of $174,285 was paid. Lee eventually paid off that bill."

I doubt this new "case" will go any differently.

Actually, she might have a case.

The courts told the store specifically:

"Valentina Boutique, Inc., shall not at any time extend further store credit to the Defendant, Vernita Lee,"

Which seems pretty clear cut. The store ignored the court, extended credit to a known credit liability which they had already won a judgement against in court, and now they're in court again.

Oprah's mom or not, I don't care, but when a store knows about a person, sues that person successfully, and then gives that person an open credit limit knowing they'll fall into the same trap.. I have little sympathy for those type of practices.

I hope she does win her case, and that the judge AGAIN says that "Valentina Boutique, Inc., shall not at any time extend further store credit to the Defendant, Vernita Lee,"

good point.

very good point indeed.

can I change my rant in the first comment? =)

Maybe, but Valentina claims they DIDN'T extend her any credit. He said - she said. Gonna depend on documentation.

Hi everyone...I am John from Mexico..I have seen your forum...Nice information provided here which is very useful to everyone....I think she wouldn't own them so she shouldn't have to pay back a dime....
thanks for posting...Let me know more about this.....
==================
simmons

i have edited out the link you provided.do not use the plime comments for free advertising.

She's not being charged with shoplifting, so willfully allowing her to walk out the door with unpaid-for merchandise amounts to extending credit.