<![CDATA[Gawker: dead animals]]> http://tags.gawker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/gawker.com.png <![CDATA[Gawker: dead animals]]> http://gawker.com/tag/deadanimals http://gawker.com/tag/deadanimals <![CDATA[Lohan Must Answer For Fur Snatching In Court]]> Lindsay Lohan is being sued over that incident in which she left a nightclub wearing someone else's blonde fur coat, a coat she had not been wearing previously, and that the owner did not give her permission to take. This means Lohan is probably going to have answer uncomfortable questions raised by the situation under oath, assuming she doesn't settle first, which she'll quickly do if she's smart. The owner of the coat, a Columbia University student of Russian extraction, received it as a gift from her grandmother and thought it was lost forever, until she saw paparazzi pictures of Lohan wearing it. She raised a stink, and the $12,000 coat was returned through intermediaries, with no explanation forthcoming. At first she asked for $10,000 compensation for the three weeks the coat was gone, but now she's likely to ask for a six-figure sum, as her attorney vowed earlier this month. If Lohan starts negotiating now, she could probably get that down to something in the mid five-figures, and avoid both a costly court battle and further damage to whatever is left of her acting career. That's, what, a couple of night's worth of coke and bottle service? [Post] (Photo: Splash)

]]> http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5009832&view=rss&microfeed=true <![CDATA[Woman Wants Six Figures For Alleged Lohan Coat Theft]]> Further details have emerged about that $12,000 fur coat that Lindsay Lohan may have pilfered (pictured). The coat owner is kindly asking Lohan for six figures in pain and suffering. Masha Markova, perhaps a descendant of the noble line of Russian fur traders, claims that the drug-splattered actress stole the blond mink coat while they were both at a party at fancypants clurrb 1Oak. When Markova decided to leave the club, she saw that her coat, which was given to her by her grandmother, had gone missing. A couple of weeks later, she saw a photo in OK! magazine, taken the night of the incident, of Lohan wearing the exact same tan-ish animal pelt. Coincidence? Markova thought not!

Of course she got her lawyer involved ("I don't know what her motivation was. Maybe it was rare to find a blond mink that matched her hair," he said graciously), and the coat was returned under mysterious circumstances. Was Lohan caught red handed (read: covered in animal blood)? She was wearing a different black coat earlier that fateful night. Intrigue! Lohan has not admitted to thievery, and Markova is seeking punitive damages in "the six figure range," because I guess the emotional anguish of losing one's fur coat for a few days is just as taxing as sexual harassment or wrongful termination or something. Markova's lawyer says: "If my client had gotten an apology (and the coat) a day later, she would have rolled her eyes and said, 'Party girl.' But it wasn't that way." Sigh. Didn't we almost have it all. The 1Oak nightclub, for what it's worth, says "Clearly, this girl is looking for publicity. She misplaced her coat. 1Oak returned it. End of story." Are they telling the truth? Are they just being loyal to the famous actress? A thickened, mysterious plot.
Picture via INF

]]> http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=388165&view=rss&microfeed=true