Bad Ideas, Biglaw, Divorce Train Wrecks, Lawsuit of the Day, Pictures, Ridiculousness, Weddings

Got an Absurd Wedding Lawsuit? Don’t Worry, Daddy’s a Biglaw Partner

Since we first started covering ridiculous wedding-related lawsuits, we’ve found that the vast majority of the plaintiffs have been women — bridezillas, if you will. But we must warn you, readers, that there is another kind of ‘zilla lurking out there.

This elusive creature is known to hide beneath layers of chiffon and tulle, and will emerge only if angered terribly by wedding vendors. By that time, it is too late to escape, and the unknowing victim will face the wrath of the mythical beast known as the groomzilla.

Today, we have terrifying news of a groomzilla sighting in Manhattan. Why so frightening, you ask? Because this groomzilla is armed with the ultimate weapon: his father is a Biglaw partner.

Which firm is championing this groomzilla’s absurd requests?

Before we spill the beans on the firm representing this groomzilla, we’ll first give you the scoop on the case at hand. Todd Remis, an unemployed equity research analyst, married Milena Grzibovska, a Latvian hottie, in 2003. The pair hired H & H Photographers to document the events of their special day. This must be a standard-issue wedding photography lawsuit, right?

Wrong. So, so wrong.

The once happy couple.

Remis and Grzibovska separated in 2008, and were divorced in 2010. But that didn’t stop Remis from suing H & H in 2009 — six years after the wedding — because he was unhappy that the studio failed to capture the bride’s bouquet toss and the couple’s last dance.

The New York Times has more information on Remis’s ridiculous demands:

[N]ot only has Mr. Remis demanded to be repaid the $4,100 cost of the photography, he also wants $48,000 to recreate the entire wedding and fly the principals to New York so the celebration can be re-shot by another photographer.

Re-enacting the wedding may pose a particular challenge, the studio pointed out, because . . . the bride is believed to have moved back to her native Latvia.

Yup, Remis — who according to H & H’s founder, Curt Fried, apparently doesn’t even know where his ex-wife lives — wants to find Grzibovska, fly her back to this country, and play dress up to the tune of almost $50,000. That’s one expensive mail-order bride.

(Talk about “specific performance”! Perhaps Remis wants to reenact the honeymoon as well?)

The full text of the eight-count complaint is available here. In January, Justice Doris Ling-Cohan dismissed the complaint’s second, third, fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth counts, making sure to poke fun at the groomzilla in the process:

This is a case in which it appears that the “misty watercolor memories’’ and the “scattered pictures of the smiles . . . left behind” at the wedding were more important than the real thing. Approximately seven years ago, plaintiff married his now divorced wife, with photographs taken by defendants. Although the marriage did not endure, plaintiff’s fury over the quality of the photographs and video continued on.

Ouch. Nothing stings like having your legal affairs likened to Barbara Streisand lyrics. The rest of Ling-Cohan’s humorous opinion is available here.

Justice Ling-Cohan left intact only Remis’s breach of contract, intentional misrepresentation, and fraud claims. And who will be litigating those claims?

Goodwin Procter, that’s who.

As it turns out, our groomzilla’s father is none other than Shepard M. Remis, a Chambers-rated partner in Goodwin’s Boston litigation department. Remis’s attorney on the matter, Frederick R. McGowen, is counsel in the firm’s New York office.

We wonder how that awkward email exchange went. Maybe a little something like this?

Shepard M. Remis

Hey Fred,

We both went to Columbia Law. Would you mind helping my son? He’s a big, big baby and wants to get a do-over on his wedding. LOL, crazy, right? Help a brother out.


P.S. I’m a partner, so even if you don’t want to do this, you kind of have to.

We certainly look forward to following this case as it plays out, and hope that the firm doesn’t face too much shame as a result. Also, memo to Shep and Fred: if our groomzilla somehow wins this case, we’d love to be cast as extras for the bride’s bouquet toss photo.

UPDATE (5:30 PM): Additional thoughts on this lawsuit are available at our sister site, Dealbreaker (via Non-Sequiturs).

Years Later, Lawsuit Seeks to Recreate a Wedding [New York Times]

Earlier: Here Comes the Bride, All Dressed in… Oops, She’s Not Dressed
Prior ATL coverage of wedding litigation

(hidden for your protection)

comments sponsored by

Show all comments