This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Construction Law
Fraud
Misrepresentation

Anna Montez, Fipe Tausinga v. Meyda's Beauty Salon

Published: Aug. 27, 2005 | Result Date: Jun. 10, 2005 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: CIV437961 Verdict –  $453,000

Judge

Steven L. Dylina

Court

San Mateo Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Norman C. Newhouse


Defendant

Peter C. Labrador

A. Marquez Bautista


Experts

Plaintiff

David A. Berman
(medical)

David M. Birka-White
(Birka-White Law Offices) (medical)

Facts

On May 16, 2001, plaintiff Anna Montez went to Meyda's Beauty Salon in Menlo Park to get information on
cosmetic lip tattooing. Montez was referred to the defendant, an employee of the salon known as "Nell", who
told her that a collagen injection would be a better alternative. Montez agreed to allow Nell, who was licensed,
to do the procedure at her home for 50 percent of what the salon charged.
The following day, Montez went to Nell's residence. Nell injected silicon, not collagen into Montez's lips.
Montez's friend, Fipe Tausinga, also received silicon injections from Nell. The injection of silicon is illegal.
Montez and Tausinga sued Meyda's Beauty Salon and Nell alleging negligence, fraud, premises liability,
vicarious liability, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and negligent misrepresentation.

Specials in Evidence

Montez and Tausinga each received $500 Montez and Tausinga each received $30,000

Damages

$300,000 requested in general damages; $200,000 requested in exemplary damages.

Injuries

At trial, the plaintiffs presented expert medical testimony that silicon was a foreign substance that their bodies would continue to reject. This would result in erupting sores requiring surgery for 20 to 30 years.

Result

The jury found that Meyda's actions constituted negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Montez and Tausinga each received: $3,500 in past general damage; $175,000 in future general damages; $17,500 in punitive damages; $500 in past medical damages; and $30,000 in future medical damages.

Other Information

Defense motions for nonsuit on the claims for fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and premises liability were granted. Defense motions for nonsuit on the remaining causes of action were denied.

Deliberation

eight hours

Poll

12-0 (on all issues), 9-3 (on apportionment of fault)

Length

five days


#92176

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390