Yes, she’s really suing the cell phone company for the breakup of her marriage

Gabriella Nagy was cheating on her husband.   In order to effectively manage both her marriage and affair, she took out an additional cell phone plan under her maiden name for the purpose of concealing the latter. 

As it turns out, she’s not that slick.  Apparently Nagy did not ask for an electronic billing of her affair account.  And her affair cell provider was Rogers Wireless, Inc. – the same provider she and her husband used for their household’s wireless and cable service.  Rogers Wireless took the liberty of consolidating both account invoices on one statement without forewarning.  Nagy’s husband inadvertently opened the lid from the can of worms when he opened their “global billing statement” the next month.  Her secret was out, and he left her.    

Rogers Wireless thought they were doing Nagy a favor.  By consolidating service statements, she would be saving a few extra dollars each month. 

Nagy’s lawyers, however, are actually trying to portray Gabriella Nagy as a sympathetic victim – to the tune of $600,000.  She contends that her husband would never have found out about the affair were it not for the consolidated bill, which showed hours of calls made from Nagy’s affair line to one phone number. 

The suit reads that she “was so distraught that her work performance suffered.”  The plaintiff “wept uncontrollably at her workplace . . . and became incapable of performing her employment duties,” according to the statement.  “I didn’t deserve to lose my life over it,” says Nagy. 

Basically, if not for the company’s itemized billing, she could have been cheating discreetly and without consequence, and her marriage would still be intact.  Her lawsuit, filed in Ontario Superior Court, alleges that Rogers Wireless invaded her privacy and breached their contract, which resulted in the ruination of her life (which is apparently worth $600,000).  I wonder what would happen if the couple remains legally married throughout the litigation and the plaintiff’s case is successful.  Would Nagy’s husband be entitled to some of her ‘earnings’ if they later divorce?

As previously reported by Walter Olson, Rogers Wireless maintains that the company "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.”