I don't agree with her ruling in the second case. There is text messages PROVING that the bride wanted an extra full rehearsal on the day of the wedding from this singer and the singer even warned her "No, I would rather not do that, so my voice can be strong for the actual event." and the bride totally disregarded that and insisted she sing in the rehearsal and as a result, she lost her voice. AT LEAST they had the songs recorded as a backup, so the didn't sound like a strangled frog trying to sing during the wedding.
What about the plaintiff rolling thru the stop sign. That had nothing to do with her eating one brownie with thc in it. She most likely had more than one glass of wine also. Why wasn’t that brought up🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️
The defendant should have been firm that she couldn't accommodate the request for an additional rehearsal, and or advised the plaintiff in advance that doing the extra likely would result in a synced performance. I don't agree with this verdict.
Both claims are granted? But that is really a wash otherwise, aside from that, the countersuit was for lost wages? What does that have to do with breach of contract?
I don't agree with her ruling in the second case. There is text messages between these two ladies PROVING that the bride wanted an extra full rehearsal on the day of the wedding from this singer "to make sure everything sounded good" and the singer even warned her "No, I would really rather not do that, so my voice can be strong for the actual event." and the bride totally disregarded that warning from the singer and insisted she sing in the rehearsal and as a result, the singer's prediction came true and she lost her voice and wasn't able to sing. AT LEAST they had the songs recorded as a backup, so the didn't sound like a strangled frog trying to sing during the wedding. I agree with you though. The singer should have gotten the lost wages reimbursed because that was completely separate from the contract. That was the bride defaming her on Facebook and as a result, she lost another gig that cost her $1000. That's not fair.
Rachel better step up and pay the defendant half back- plaintiff may have lost Rachel as a friend- and Rachel very well have lost TWO friends.
The defendant is a liar...Her lip sync scam just got busted out on this gig🤥 😂
I don't agree with her ruling in the second case. There is text messages PROVING that the bride wanted an extra full rehearsal on the day of the wedding from this singer and the singer even warned her "No, I would rather not do that, so my voice can be strong for the actual event." and the bride totally disregarded that and insisted she sing in the rehearsal and as a result, she lost her voice. AT LEAST they had the songs recorded as a backup, so the didn't sound like a strangled frog trying to sing during the wedding.
What about the plaintiff rolling thru the stop sign. That had nothing to do with her eating one brownie with thc in it. She most likely had more than one glass of wine also. Why wasn’t that brought up🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️
Maybe she had that "I'm Sexy & Hot Armor" 🥵🥵
She was Her. You know that saying?
The defendant should have been firm that she couldn't accommodate the request for an additional rehearsal, and or advised the plaintiff in advance that doing the extra likely would result in a synced performance.
I don't agree with this verdict.
Both claims are granted? But that is really a wash otherwise, aside from that, the countersuit was for lost wages? What does that have to do with breach of contract?
I don't agree with her ruling in the second case. There is text messages between these two ladies PROVING that the bride wanted an extra full rehearsal on the day of the wedding from this singer "to make sure everything sounded good" and the singer even warned her "No, I would really rather not do that, so my voice can be strong for the actual event." and the bride totally disregarded that warning from the singer and insisted she sing in the rehearsal and as a result, the singer's prediction came true and she lost her voice and wasn't able to sing. AT LEAST they had the songs recorded as a backup, so the didn't sound like a strangled frog trying to sing during the wedding. I agree with you though. The singer should have gotten the lost wages reimbursed because that was completely separate from the contract. That was the bride defaming her on Facebook and as a result, she lost another gig that cost her $1000. That's not fair.
The plaintiff reminds me of Mirabel from Encanto.
The defendant had an attitude
2nd Case: This is exactly why I don't care for weddings. Brides EASILY turn into bridezillas and it's wild!
Bridezilla in the second case is likely to be divorced pretty quick if she don't quit being a beyatch.
Wow x2