Passing the Cups: California Pageant Seeks Reimbursement for Prejean’s Augmentation Surgery

150px-CarriePrejeanByPhilKonstantinNow, this is some pretty vicious litigation. Miss California USA officials want Carrie Prejean to give back the $5,200 that they say she borrowed to have her breasts augmented last year. Prejean is suing the pageant in a lawsuit that includes a privacy violation related to the disclosure of the augmentation.

The lawyers for the pageant insist that the truth over Prejean’s procedure “ceased being private during the swimsuit competition of the nationally televised Miss USA pageant, in which Ms. Prejean walked the stage in a bikini.”

They are seeking money from any profits from Prejean’s book due out next month, which they claim was written in violation of her pageant contract. They promise to donate the proceeds to charity — presumably to pay for augmentation for the impoverished.

Also notable in the filing is the incorporation of Biblical authority: “[Prejean] attempts to cast herself as a virtuous young woman and the victim in a supposed conspiracy against her. Had she heeded the guidance of the Gospel of John, who admonished only those who are without sin to cast stones in judgment, she might have avoided this legal battle — which will ultimately reveal the hypocrisy of Carrie Prejean.”

For the full story, click here.

28 thoughts on “Passing the Cups: California Pageant Seeks Reimbursement for Prejean’s Augmentation Surgery”

  1. rafflaw-
    Watching any story on her going all the way back to the initial controversy about her gay marriage remarks usually included footage of her in the swimsuit competition. I can assure you, no “investigation” was needed (or desired).

    Now excuse me, I have several pending “cases” that I’m working on.

  2. FFLEO,

    You know how what makes a dog a good “show dog” and what makes a dog something you’d want to own are different?

    Same thing goes for beauty pageants.

  3. Why has not anyone named The Donald in the Lawsuit? Does he not own these beauty pageants? I was just wondering?

  4. This is the saddest part of this entire case. Most men do not want to look at or touch skin-tone water baloons…

    Quote from the link:

    “One thing they all agreed on was that Prejean needed bigger breasts if she was to be competitive in the national pageant in April, the filing said.”

  5. “Passing the cups…”
    ________________________________

    Unfortunately, after all this hissy-fit fussin’ and the substantial coin invested for hopes of the inflated Miss USA titular, Miss Prejeans cups still do not runneth over….

    Since theys’ heathins amongst us and this is a religious thread, I will explain from whence by quote derived:

    “My Cup Runneth Over” is a quote from the Hebrew Bible[1] (Psalms 23:5) and means “I have more than enough for my needs”

  6. rafflaw and leah-

    Her boob job was laughably easy to spot whether you’d seen the originals or not. There are some garments that can make a guess less than 100% accurate, but when I heard about this story and the idea that she thought that they revealed anything, I almost did a spit take. The girl looks like she has two coconut shell halves grafted to her chest.

  7. Part of the test psychologists use to see if someone is in touch with reality is the following question–What does the phrase, “people who live in glass houses should not throw stones”, mean?

  8. Byron,

    Just out of curiosity: You’d probably consider yourself closer to being a libertarian than anyone else here right?

    Do you know what liberal hypocrisy Libertarian is talking about Dennis being right about?

    I honestly can’t figure it out without assuming a lack of understanding of the situation so severe as to be highly insulting to him.

  9. Dennis–

    When you talk about “an immoral corrupt system” are you referring to the Miss California USA Pageant and its officials? I certainly wouldn’t consider beauty pageants part of a liberal establishment. Perish the thought!

    Speaking for myself, I don’t have much respect for beauty pageants. Neither do I have much respect for a beauty contestant who has a photographer take pictures of her while she’s semi-nude/topless for the purpose of promoting herself. (I’m not talking pageant bikini pictures here.) Prejean isn’t exactly the type of woman I’d hold up as a heroine. I wouldn’t put Carrie Prejean on a pedestal just yet.

    I wonder if either side of this case can claim the “moral” high ground.

  10. Dennis is right-on. All the talk we hear is about Republican hypocrisy (much of it justified, for sure), but there is equal liberal hypocrisy, and some of it is right in front of us on this beautiful weblog.

    When will they learn?

  11. Dennis,

    That right there was a great rambling incoherent rant. Do you take requests? It’s been a long time since I’ve heard anyone rant incoherently in authentic Western Gibberish.

  12. Carrie Prejean is amazing to be 22 years old and taking on an immoral corrupt system that accuses her of being immoral. If she cannot publicly state her beliefs about her values about marriage are, then why should homosexuals expect anyone to listen to their bitching and moaning about equal rights with married heterosexuals? If you believe the bible (and I don’t think for a minute these officials do), homosexuality is a sin. So is adultery, fornication and pedophilia. Next thing you know, someone will be filing a suit to make children adults at age 10 (much like they have done to put 12 years olds on trial as adults). At that point, “katy bar the door”. It will be open season to do what you want with whom you want. After all – that’s in large part what the liberal establishment wants – as long as someone else pays for it. If I were Carrie, I would tell them to take their title, their accusations, their immoral, lying tongues – roll them up in a ball and stick them where the “sun doesn’t shine”.

  13. Doesn’t the bible these bible-thumpers thump proclaim that the body is a temple? Mutilating your body to make it more sexually attractive to look at (certainly not to touch) seems pretty corrupt, but then so does wiping entire species off the face of the earth. I can only hope that enough of this theology is true that these people can someday meet their creator and have her say, “So where are the polar bears and salmon I left with you?”

  14. This reminds me of an article I read about an Attorney Discipline (member) whose responsibility was to prosecute inappropriate relationships between Attorney and Clients was himself charged with inappropriate behavior while on a trip with one of his office staff.

    I forget what state, but it was kind of a funny thing that happened on the way to the forum….

  15. I’m not sure how walking on stage in a bikini would tell the world that Prejean had been augmented. However, something about this woman’s attempt to rely on the Bible as a basis for a law suit (or for her prattling on about the sins of others…casting aspersions and judgments on gay people), doesn’t sit too well with me. Not being a biblical scholar (and reaching far back into my childhood for a mostly forgotten passage) doesn’t the Bible also admonish women to be modest in their dress and demeanor? I don’t recall that it stated any heavenly rules specifically related to bikinis, but it seems like exposing most of one’s body while strutting across a stage with one’s fake puppies sitting up and barking might fit into that admonishment somewhere. Methinks Ms. Prejean sort of picks and chooses her own rules according to how much or little they benefit her.

  16. This was an “Oral” Contract….Me thinks that the UCC, Statute of Frauds and the Statute of Anne would control. The pageant will or would come up a little short and this would be ripe for a 12(b)(6) Motion or the states equivalent. Notwithstanding the violation of her right to medical privacy under Hippa which the first violation to the offending party is 50 thousand and rises sharply after that.

    I believe that it still has to be able to be performed within 1 year. Promissory Estoppel may apply.

    “The California Supreme Court has ruled the applicability of the statute of frauds must be analyzed prospectively, based on the intentions of the parties and the terms of the agreement at the time it is made. Foley v. Interactive Data Corp., 765 P.2d 373, 383 n. 18 (Cal.1988).”

    Assuming arguendo that an oral contract existed, the record clearly shows Klein never fully performed the contract. Therefore, we conclude the district court correctly ruled that the partial performance of Klein does not exempt the alleged oral contract from the statute of frauds.

    Link: http://openjurist.org/66/f3d/335/klein-v-dominos-pizza-inc

    Sec. 52-550. Statute of frauds; written agreement or memorandum. (a) No civil action may be maintained in the following cases unless the agreement, or a memorandum of the agreement, is made in writing and signed by the party, or the agent of the party, to be charged: (1) Upon any agreement to charge any executor or administrator, upon a special promise to answer damages out of his own property; (2) against any person upon any special promise to answer for the debt, default or miscarriage of another; (3) upon any agreement made upon consideration of marriage; (4) upon any agreement for the sale of real property or any interest in or concerning real property; (5) upon any agreement that is not to be performed within one year from the making thereof; or (6) upon any agreement for a loan in an amount which exceeds fifty thousand dollars.

    (b) This section shall not apply to parol agreements for hiring or leasing real property, or any interest therein, for one year or less, in pursuance of which the leased premises have been or are actually occupied by the lessee, or any person claiming under him, during any part of the term.

    link: http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/pub/chap923.htm

  17. rafflaw:

    I agree with you. Who concedes that their own client is guilty of “sin” in the first place?

  18. Why do I get nervous when I read biblical passages in court filings? This is one disgusting mess. Why would a pageant lend money to a contestant for breast augmentation? Were other contestants afforded that opportunity? I guess if people who knew here saw the bikini pose they might know something had changed, but the viewing public wouldn’t know unless the pageant spills the beans. I think that their privacy violation claim could be valid.

Comments are closed.