Damn the damages.
So, at least, says Samantha Ronson's former lawyer, who has lobbed the latest offensive in his ongoing suit against Lindsay Lohan's bosom buddy, requesting that part of the DJ's malpractice and negligence suit filed in the wake of her legal loss against blogger Perez Hilton be stricken.
More specifically, the part where she's trying to score some hefty punitive damages.
In court papers filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on Tuesday, attorney Martin Garbus, who unsuccessfully defended Ronson in her defamation suit against Hilton, claims that none of Ronson's allegations warrant a request for punitive damages as they claim neither fraud, malice nor oppression, all prerequisites for the monetary request.
Just last month, Ronson amended her lawsuit against Garbus, first filed back on May 1, swapping out a legalese allegation of breach of the covenant of good faith and good dealing for the much more cut-and-dry claim of legal malpractice.
Also remaining in her suit are the original allegations of negligence, breach of contract and breach of fiduciary responsibility, all of which were lobbed, she said, because Garbus abandoned defending her against Hilton in the midst of her trial due to a conflict of interest over payment.
For his part, in his new answer to her amended suit, Garbus claims that her new legal malpractice claim duplicates her original claim of negligence and therefore should be tossed out.
A hearing on Garbus' new motion has been set for Sept. 29.