Walmart Dress Caused Sexless Marriage, Lawsuit Claims - Legally Weird
Legally Weird - The FindLaw Legal Curiosities Blog

Walmart Dress Caused Sexless Marriage, Lawsuit Claims

A Florida Walmart shopper is suing the retail giant for selling her a dress three years ago that she blames for the lack of sex in her marriage.

Aracely Gonzalez is suing Walmart, claiming that the dress gave her "heart palpitations and a severe rash" that marked the end of "marital relations between the woman and her husband, reports United Press International.

Can you really sue Walmart for ruining your marital sex life?

Loss of Consortium from Walmart Coiture

The suit filed by Gonzalez includes claims for negligence, strict liability, breach of warranty, and (most unsexily) loss of consortium.

Loss of consortium was originally devised as a way for husbands to sue a third party for injuries caused to his wife, who in days of yore could not sue -- for lack of being a legal person. That obnoxious part of history behind us, men and women can now sue for loss of consortium when a third party injures a spouse in a way that deprives a plaintiff of the affection, solace, comfort, or sexual relations normally had between the two.

For Gonzalez, this meant that her allegedly itchy Walmart dress, from which she developed a "excruciating painful red rash" that was diagnosed as dermatitis, according to UPI, ruined the intamcy between her and her spouse. Eight days after being diagnosed with the rash, Gonzalez was forced to return to the hospital for heart palpitations -- allegedly also caused by the Walmart dress.

What Can She Recover?

Women who suffer serious injuries from wearing items like a cursed Walmart dress can potentially recover under a theory of product liability -- claiming the rash-causing dress was defective.

From her various claims, Gonzalez likely hopes to recover for the following kinds of damages:

  • Medical expenses (past, present, and future);
  • Mental anguish;
  • Pain and suffering;
  • Loss of consortium;
  • Disfigurement; and
  • The cost of the dress.

Hopefully, the rash allegedly left by Gonzalez's irritating Walmart purchase is not permanently disfiguring, but the more damaging the injuries, the larger her monetary recovery is likely to be.

And although you can't put a price on the comfort or sexual congress felt between a husband and wife, if Gonzalez's case goes to trial, a jury will have to.

Follow FindLaw for Consumers on Facebook and Twitter (@FindLawConsumer).

Related Resources: