Torontonian Woman Sues Rogers After Lover is Revealed

Gabriella Nagy was in a passionate and loving relationship for the last few weeks before an event occured that led to her sueing Rogers Wireless, and unfortunately, this relationship wasn't the wth her husband, with whom she had two children under 8 years old. Gabriella had a personal cell phone account with Rogers in 2007, which was under her maiden name, and sent to her as an individual bill. Her husband, who's name is not being revealed out of obvious embarassment, opened up the cable and television bill, which was always in his name, to find Rogers had made their bills a "global bill", packaging the envelope as "Ms. Nagy and Mr. ____". This is where he found her cell phone had made several phone calls to a number he had never seen before, some of which that lasted hours. After calling the number, the recipient of the call revealed his affair with Gabriella, and Gabriella's husband immediately left her, without a single word to why he had left. When she was left with her two young children, a month later, she received an invoice from Rogers, stating that the couple's matrinomy made them one individual account. A few months later, October 2007, the stress of her marriage falling apart and being a new single mother caused her work performance to go down, and she lost her job as an apartment rental agent. Now, the woman is suing Rogers, stating that "it was a mistake, and she didn't deserve to lose her life over it", and her lawyer states that "the plaintiff’s maiden name and the husband's surname were different. Such unilateral action by the defendant was done without the knowledge, information, belief, acquiescence or approval of the plaintiff". We will soon see if the $600,000 law suit goes anywhere, and if young Gabriela Nagy's life will finally see some redemption, after her extramarital affair ruined it.

I would say that she made a mistake, but that Rogers' amateurish mistake and clear mistep of boundaries was the only reason for her marriage ending. I do think it is stretching the truth a bit to say they are the reason for her losing her job, but I would like to see her lawyer's argument for this, as a single mother and apartment agent are two jobs that are hard to do at once, especially amidst a divorce. Rogers is now saying that they "cannot be held responsible for the condition of the marriage, for the plaintiff's affair and consequential marriage break-up, nor the effects the break-up has had on her". I would disagree with this full heartedly, but we will all see when this officially goes to trial. To read the original article, click on the link here.