(11-15-2006) Ex U2 stylist loses appeal in memorabilia case - RTE*

[HelloAngel]

Ex U2 stylist loses appeal in memorabilia case


The former U2 stylist, Lola Cashman, has lost her High Court appeal against a decision ordering her to return items belonging to the band.

She had claimed the items were given to her when she worked on U2's Joshua Tree tour in the 1980s.

The disputed items, including Bono's Stetson, are thought to be worth about €5,000.

During the Joshua Tree tour, Ms Cashman claimed she was given gifts by the band, including a pair of trousers, a sweatshirt, a pair of earrings and a Stetson hat.

In 2001, Ms Cashman tried to place some items of U2 memorabilia in a sale at London auction house Christies.

But when they heard about this, the band wrote to Christies disputing her ownership of some of the items.

It later issued civil proceedings against Ms Cashman in the Dublin Circuit Civil Court, seeking their return.

Last year that court found in favour of the band and ordered that the items be returned within seven days.

Ms Cashman appealed the judgement to the High Court, which heard the case over three days last month.

This morning, Mr Justice Michael Peart rejected the appeal.

He said he could not be satisfied, in light of all the evidence, that it was more likely that the account given by Ms Cashman was more correct than that given by the band.

He added that Ms Cashman's evidence lacked credibility, plausibility or probability.

Counsel for the band said it was waiving any claim for its costs arising from either hearing.

Neither Ms Cashman nor the band were in court for the judgement.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/1115/u2.html

 

[kimby]

The band is waiving any claim for its cost arising from either hearing?

 

[JCOSTER]

The band is waiving any claim for its cost arising from either hearing?

What does that mean?

 

[Liesje]

Maybe it means they're not going to force her to pay all the legal costs for these suits? I think normally she has to pay, since she was the one that brought the lawsuits and lost. Perhaps it's in response to all the media claims that U2 were intentionally trying to bankrupt her. I could be reading it backwards though. Maybe it means they're not going to help with the costs?

 

[Pamelakellett]

I think you are right in that U2 will be paying for their own legal costs in both cases. Normally the person who loses has to pay for both sides legal costs. Quite generous of them considering the time it has cost them.

 

[david]

what about the polaroids!

 

[biff]

I posted this much longer article in another thread. FYI, here it is again:

Times Online November 15, 2006


U2 win High Court battle over Stetson hat
By Lee Glendinning



U2 have won a High Court battle over the ownership of Bono's famed cowboy hat, after their former stylist was ordered to return the item along with other clothes and belongings she took from the band almost two decades ago.

Lola Cashman, the stylist with a "good eye" but "eccentric" personality, who worked with the band for nine months from 1987-88, insisted that the Stetson hat was a gift, given to her when she left the band at the conclusion of the Joshua Tree tour.

She launched an appeal against a ruling that ordered her to return the items.

But after a lengthy and costly legal fight with the rock heavyweights, a High Court judge in Dublin ruled that on the balance of probability the items were not given to her during the tour.

Senior counsel for U2, Paul Sreenan, said they would not be pursuing costs against Ms Cashman for the appeal or an earlier circuit court action she lost last year. Neither the band - who are presently on tour in Australia - nor Ms Cashman were in court for the ruling.

Mr Justice Michael Peart also ordered that two souvenirs mugs, a Christmas decoration, two Polaroid photographs and a photocopy of a hand-written list of U2 songs must be returned to the band.

In his 38-page judgment on the case, he accepted that a pair of black Converse All Star boots, which belonged to drummer Larry Mullen Jnr, were given to Ms Cashman.

During the trial, Bono, aka Paul Hewson, told the court that the trademark Stetson hat was his idea, conceived before Ms Cashman arrived to work with the band.

He had come up with the image, he said, to represent American iconography. "It was always part of my idea of how I wanted to present myself to the world in an iconic sense," he said.

Ms Cashman was found by U2's management company through an agency before the tour, and was selected personally by Bono to replace a stylist on maternity leave.

"It was a very big moment in the band’s career," Bono, 46, said, describing how it was the point the band was moving out from playing in arenas to outdoors stadiums.

"Everything had come right for us. We had a lot of songs on radio around the world and particularly in the US we had a couple of number one singles."

Styling wasn’t one of the band’s strengths, he said, and Ms Cashman was a natural, despite her "eccentric behaviour".

"She was unusual," he said. "She wore my clothes all the time and the other band members’ clothes. We went a very great distance to keep Lola Cashman because she was very good at her job."


Ms Cashman was responsible for the transport of all wardrobe items during her nine months with U2. Bono said he had stressed it was important to the band, as well as Paul McGuinness, their manager, to keep record of their memorabilia to either archive or donate.

"We thought it would have some importance of the history of the band," he said. "We hoped we would be around long enough to be part of that."



It was after the Joshua Tree tour in 1987, that Ms Cashman claimed she was given the hat along with a pair of metal-hooped earrings, a green sweatshirt and a pair of black trousers, which in total, were estimated to be worth £3,500.

U2 first become aware that Ms Cashman had some of their belongings in 1992, Bono told the court, after an employee visited her apartment.

Anxious to preserve memorabilia, both for historical reasons, and to raise money for charity, they tried then to recover items, which also included a video tape, video monitor, rosary beads and photographs.

In 2000 Ms Cashman put some of the memorabilia, including a signed album cover, up for auction at Sotheby’s. She said there had been no objections until she placed the remaining items for sale at Christie’s in 2002 when she received two letters from lawyers seeking their return.

 

[biff]

And yes, that definitely means that they will not make Cashman pay the court costs for which she would normally be liable.
They've had enough bad press lately!

 

[U2FanPeter]

Ms Cashman was found by U2's management company through an agency before the tour, and was selected personally by Bono to replace a stylist on maternity leave.

U2 had stylists prior to Joshua Tree?

 

[ROCKMEISTER]

PLEASE STANDBY FOR TRANSMISSION:I'm sure glad she wasn't there stylist for the POPMART TOUR,she could have seriously injured her back while trying to haul that humungous mirrored lemon up the stair's to her apartment and then would probably tried to sue U2!So when does the "HAT" go on tour?!

 

[Carek1230]

I am glad Cashman lost. She deserved to lose for what stupid stunts she tried to pull. Hope she fades away now, she's had her 15 plus minutes of fame if you want to call it that. Poor negative media coverage but fame nonetheless.

 

[blueeyedgirl]

For goodness sake, she's not the Anti-Christ!

 

[biff]

Here's another report from The Irish Independent. This one includes the band's official statement at the conclusion of the case. I haven't seen this elsewhere:

Shocked stylist claims 'culture of celebrity' behind failed appeal

Lola Cashman: the stylist claimed she had been 'gifted' the U2 items in her possession

BITTERLY disappointed Lola Cashman has claimed the "cult of celebrity" triumphed over the facts in her failed appeal to keep valuable U2 memorabilia.

Speaking to the Irish Independent, the shocked stylist gave a stinging indictment of the verdict in her five-year court battle with the Dublin foursome.

She said she was "obviously disappointed" with the outcome and declared that celebrity culture had had far more impact than the facts presented in court.

Ms Cashman yesterday lost her High Court appeal against an earlier Dublin Circuit Civil Court decision ordering her to return items belonging to the international rock stars.

Her angry response came despite the fact that U2 revealed it would not pursue her for costs.

However, the London-based stylist will still have to cover her own Circuit and High Court costs in the wake of the case.

The items she claimed the rock band gave her during their Joshua Tree tour in the late 1980s are worth an estimated €5,000.

Ms Cashman, who lives in London, claimed Bono's trademark Stetson hat, a pair of trousers, a sweatshirt, and a pair of earrings were "gifts". But the band disputed her ownership of the items when she tried to place some of them in an auction house sale in 2001.

"I am obviously disappointed with this verdict," she said last night. "It seems that in this day and age the cult of celebrity has a far greater bearing on the outcome of a court case than the facts presented.

"I have not yet had sufficient time to fully digest the consequences of this decision. As and when I have I will make a further statement."

Bono, Larry Mullen, Adam Clayton, and the Edge took time out from their Australian tour to "wish her well in the future". They said they were "relieved" and hoped all litigation would now be laid to rest.

"U2 is entitled to recover substantial costs of yesterday's appeal judgment from Ms Cashman," said a spokesperson at the band's Dublin-based public relations firm, Lindsey Holmes Publicity. "They will not be seeking to recover these costs.

"U2 is relieved that this matter has now concluded and hopes that yesterday's outcome brings closure to all issues between the band and Ms Cashman.

"In 2004, Ms Cashman issued proceedings against the band and its individual members in London on the basis of an allegation that correspondence between the band's representative and Christies amounted to defamation.

"Substantial compensation was claimed by Ms Cashman in those proceedings. The band hopes that by resolving the ownership of the disputed items in the Irish courts that litigation will also now come to an end. Proceedings were issued in Ireland very much as a last resort and with great reluctance.

"U2 wishes Ms Cashman well in the future."

The row between the band and its former stylist led to many strong words, in particular those issued by U2 manager Paul McGuinness.

He famously referred to Ms Cashman as "utterly disloyal" and a "traitor".




I'm not sure they've seen the last of her, despite the fact that she now stands no chance of winning the "substantial compensation" she had asked for in her defamation suit.
I wonder what her "further statement" will entail. (Another threat, perhaps?)

 

[biff]

Well, it didn't take her long to come up with her "further statement". It was indeed a threat. Once again from The Irish Independent:

Proud Lola is ready to sing to pay debts after U2 court row

LOLA CASHMAN: Hurt by accusations during case

LARISSA NOLAN

"BONO and the other members of U2 are bracing themselves for further revelations by their former stylist Lola Cashman, who is offering to tell all about her time with the band for €50,000.

Ms Cashman is selling her story after losing her long-running case over the ownership of Bono's hat and other memorabilia in the High Court last week.

She was left with a hefty legal bill that she said would leave her financially destitute.

It is believed she is prepared to spill the beans in order to claw back some of the massive costs, estimated to be in the region of €75,000.

However, Ms Cashman is also ready to tell all about her time working for the band as she feels hurt by accusations thrown at her through the court case.

At one point, U2 manager Paul McGuinness described her as "disloyal" and "a traitor" and Bono said her book about life with the band, Inside the Zoo with U2, was "reprehensible".

Friends of Ms Cashman said she no longer has any respect for the band following the case and is ready to "sing like a canary".

Lola Cashman told friends: "I was never disloyal to them [U2] before, but I have no problem being disloyal now after all that has happened."

She described last Wednesday's judgment against her by Justice Michael Peart as "a bombshell" but said she did not see herself as a victim.

She told a friend: "The whole thing did wear me down, but I don't want people to think 'poor Lola'. I'm not a victim, I'm proud.

"I'm glad I went ahead with the case, no matter what. I'm proud of myself for having the courage of my convictions. I know I was telling the truth, but as far as I am concerned, the truth did not come out. It's sad justice was not done and I am majorly disappointed about that."

However, she said it did not come as too much of a surprise as she felt she had not performed well in the witness box.

A friend said: "She feels she let herself down, but knows she did the best she could."

Ms Cashman feels she has to sell her story now to help pay off some of the "huge financial debt" she has incurred.

The friend said: "She is not greedy, but she knows she can make money from this and she certainly needs it now. Why not?

"U2 are so money-driven that they went to the High Court to stop her making a few thousand euros out of a few trinkets. There is no reason why she should not gain some financial benefit after the court ordeal."

The designer faced a court battle with the biggest band in the world after she tried to put some items of memorabilia up for auction at Christie's for €5,000. The items included a back-up hat for Bono's famous Stetson, which he wore on the cover of the Rattle and Hum album, Bono's leather trousers and converse boots belonging to drummer Larry Mullen."



Lol, she "was never disloyal to them before"! What was that book then, a love letter?

And she calls the decision a "bombshell" but "not too much of a surprise". Huh?

And sheesh, she took them to court first. Excellent journalism there, Larissa Nolan.

 

[U2girl]

I wish the band didn't insist on her NOT paying for all the legal costs except her own. I say she dragged this in court, she ought to pay if she loses in court too. Isn't the general rule that the losing party pays for all the legal costs?

Nothing says loyalty like "borrowing" the items, selling stuff from your ex-employee, dragging them to court and making threats to them/badmouthing and writing a revealing book. And from the looks of it, more badmouthing to come.
(and I liked how kicking a band member in the crotch after a show means they were "friends")

It's funny she even tries the "not about money" line after selling stuff in auction, writing a book (as if she didn't get payed for that), and I'm guessing an exclusive interview now.

If I was her I'd say thank you to the band for not making her pay for all the costs, and walk away already.

"It seems that in this day and age the cult of celebrity has a far greater bearing on the outcome of a court case than the facts presented."
Yes, I'm sure two judges in a row were so smitten with Bono (and Larry) they completely ignored the facts.

Can you say sore loser?

 

[Vincent Vega]

It's hilarious how the people leave facts out.

It's a friend the reporter spoke to, but still it's not true that "U2 are so money-driven that they went to the High Court", they always repeated that they want to keep their memorabilia and even if the sold those things, money wouldn't go in the bands pockets.

And now she feels free to tell anything, whether true or not. Great!

There are so many people working for U2 at each and every tour, and she of all people got four important items as a present? Not even she can belief herself.

 

[U2girl]

.

 

[Liesje]

It's hilarious how the people leave facts out.

It's a friend the reporter spoke to, but still it's not true that "U2 are so money-driven that they went to the High Court"

Yeah. If I were U2 I probably would've let it go from the beginning, but hindsight is 20/20 Cashman brought U2 to court, both times. Her whining about court costs is pitiful, since these were her lawsuits, and they've offered to pay their part even though it's her responsibility.