Just found this CNN article:
- A federal jury awarded as much as $434,000 to a Ukrainian woman who sued the Internet matchmaking service that set her up with the man who allegedly abused her after they wed.
Nataliya Fox accused Encounters International of fraud and negligence, saying it should have screened its male clients and told her about a law that helps foreign nationals escape abusive relationships without fear of automatic deportation.
Instead, Fox testified, agency owner Natasha Spivack told her to endure the alleged abuse or return to Ukraine.
I can’t say if I’d hold the agency responsible for background checks, since its relatively easy to lie on these things. However, the response to “endure” the abuse – especially when they could have easily provided her wth a way out – is so intolerable that I can’t disagree with the judgement.
Sounds like legal hooie. Speaking as a lawyer of course. That does not mean that this lady Spivack, is not a terrible human being, though.
I’ll agree that it was wrong of them to tell her to stay with the abuse or go back to Ukraine, but by the same token I’m not sure this is what torts are for, IMHO. Were they wrong? yes. But was it their responsibiity to provide her with abuse counsel? Most likely not. Should someone be looking into this and making sure it doesn’t happen again? Absolutely. Did awarding her $400 000 plus change actually make anything better? hard to say.
Isn’t Ukraine a democratic country? I’m sure it’s no bowl of cherries to live there but staying in an abusive relationship in America is better? I agree with Zev that there is something fishy about this whole story.
Also, I don’t think that turning to an interent dating service for advice is the best idea in any field, but I suppose that abused people can’t be faulted for reaching out to anyone they think might help.