House Woes Give Former ‘NYPD’ Actress the Blues
We’re baaaaaaaack, with news of slippery slopes . . . Swell action figures . . . Cases that won’t die . . . And a case of moo shu possum.
Gail O’Grady, best known for her former role as Miss Abandando, the bombshell receptionist on television’s “NYPD Blue,” has sued the city of Los Angeles for $3.3 million. Her negligence suit, filed in Van Nuys Superior Court, accuses the city of failing to enforce building codes during construction of her $2-million custom home in the Encino hills.
O’Grady and her husband, Anthony J. Pellegrino, say in court papers filed in Van Nuys that lax enforcement of grading and sewer requirements caused a 200-foot retaining wall to collapse and the septic tank to back up into the house during an El Nino storm in February 1998.
The couple have also sued the builder, George Justice & Associates; that case is in mediation, attorney Joel Castro said.
According to court papers, a major portion of O’Grady’s backyard went slip-sliding away during the storm, causing a “major failure” of the foundation, septic system, pool and drainage system. When the couple complained to the city, Castro said, “they were told there’s no use crying over spilt milk.”
The house sits on top of a hill and has a view to die for, the lawyer said. While repairs are in the works, “it still looks like a war zone up there.”
The property was once part of a ranch owned by John Wayne. A spokesman for the city attorney’s office could not be reached late Friday.
*
FACTOID: Read enough lawsuits, you learn all kinds of things. A recent federal suit concerning copyrights and Tarzan action figures included this tidbit:
“Mattel was founded in 1945 by Eliot and Ruth Handler and Harold ‘Matt’ Mattson. The name of the company was created by incorporating the names of two of its founders, ‘MATT’-son and ‘EL’-iot.”
The suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, seeks a judge’s declaration that action figures sold in connection with the Disney “Tarzan” movie don’t infringe on a copyright held by the makers of the old “Tarzan” television show. The Disney/Mattel Tarzans are licensed by the heirs of the ape man’s creator, writer Edgar Rice Burroughs, court papers say.
*
CASES THAT WON’T DI(E): Here are four cases you could call the Energizer bunnies of L.A. law. They just keep on going and going and going. . . .
* Pamela Anderson Lee has amended her federal court suit over the Internet distribution of a tape of her doing the wild thing with rocker Bret Michaels. The suit now names Internet Entertainment Group founder Seth Warshawsky as a defendant.
* A federal appeals court says the Franklin Mint can continue to sell Princess Diana trinkets. The Diana Princess of Wales Memorial Fund had wanted to put an end to that. But the court found that British law, which does not recognize celebrity publicity rights, prevails in this case. So, the mint can keep those Di doodads coming.
* Barbara Neugass, a former gal pal of actor Jack Klugman, is seeking a new trial for her palimony suit. She says the jury that ruled against her was wrong. Klugman testified that he loved his dogs more than he loved her and never promised to set her up for life.
* Sean Penn has once again sued a lawyer over a dispute involving a Santa Monica nightclub. Penn claims that attorney John S. Hilbert failed to pay him $22,500--the amount he promised to fork over to resolve the matter. In a March 1998 suit, Penn accused Hilbert of interfering with his plans to sell the financially ailing club so he could buy into it himself.
*
MEATY ISSUES: Hey, L.A. County inmates, while you gag on that jail food, consider the case of Dan Goodrick of Kootenai County, Idaho. He says they feed inmates road kill there.
Goodrick, claiming that the jail food made him sick, sued the county and state, which ran a program supplying “wild game” meals. The county, while admitting that the menu might include animals found dead on the roads, denied that the meat wasn’t wholesome. After all, the carcasses were treated at a licensed slaughterhouse, weren’t they?
A federal judge in Idaho had tossed out Goodrick’s civil suit against the county and the state, but let him proceed with his case against the local sheriff. But the judge wouldn’t give Goodrick a lawyer. The plaintiff wound up representing himself and lost a jury trial in federal court in Idaho.
The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled that Goodrick should get a new trial--this time with a lawyer and access to his own medical records, as well as records concerning the jail’s food program.
Pass the bread and water, please.