The Plaintiff: Rorie Weisberg
The Defendant: L'Oréal and Lancôme

The Complaint: Weisberg, an Orthodox Jewish woman from New York, purchased a 1 oz. bottle of Lancôme Teint Idole Ultra 24H Foundation, $45, to wear to her son's bar mitzvah. Since Jewish law forbids women from applying makeup from sundown on Friday until Saturday night, Weisberg hoped the 24-hour foundation would help her comply with her religious practices and keep her looking flawless for the big event. Weisberg tested the foundation, wearing it for a full 24 hours (AKA sleeping in it), and found that it left her skin cakey and had almost completely come off by 3pm the following day.

She's currently suing Lancôme and its parent company L'Oréal for "deceptive acts and practices," and seeking "unspecified damages," and "a corrective advertising campaign." No word on if she's found another option for the bar mitzvah.

The Plaintiff: Jennifer Fahey
The Defendant: Wal-Mart and Vi-Jon

The Complaint: Fahey, a Portland woman who has had hair reaching the small of her back since childhood, is suing Wal-Mart and personal care brand Vi-Jon to the tune of $10,000. Fahey claims that within seconds of using the Equate Everyday Clean Dandruff Shampoo, $3.44, she picked up at Wal-Mart, her hair became so tangled, she had to cut out a few feet of hair, leaving her with a measly four inches of hair and "past, present and future physical and emotional pain and suffering, anxiety, humiliation and embarrassment, expenses for replacement hair, along with diminished and lost wages."

The lawsuit is still pending, but we hope Fahey can embrace her extremely on-trend pixie cut in the meantime.

The Plaintiff: HairTech International
The Defendant: Paris Hilton

The Complaint: Back in 2007, hotel heiress Paris Hilton signed on to be the spokesperson for Hairtech International's Dream Catchers hair extensions. Everything was fine and dandy until the hair brand claimed Hilton stepped out wearing another company's extensions and subsequently sued her for $35 million. The company also claimed that Paris's jail sentence not only broke the implied "obey the law" term in her contract, but cost the company $6 million in revenue when she missed out on a party where "more than 600 hair extension professionals" were scheduled to attend.

Hilton didn't bat an eye and filed a $1.7 billion counter suit. Not long after, HairTech admitted it recieved innacurate information and dropped the case. May we suggest a refersher course in hair extensions before we go around pointing fingers?

The Plaintiff: Sarah Jane Ward
The Defendant: Rumi Simone Inc.

The Complaint: After visiting a new stylist at Rumi Simone salon, Ward claims most of her hair started to snap off at her scalp. So, she demanded $50,000 in damages to compensate her suffering and for a set of extensions to cover it up until her own hair grew back. Because Ward had been bleaching her hair since the age of nine, and teased her fragile hair on the regular, the jury concluded 11-1 that the salon wasn't at fault for her hair loss. We're guessing that lone juror is a fan of peroxide and backcombing as well.

The Plaintiff: Katherine Heigl The Defendant: Duane Reade Inc.

The Complaint: After picking up a few items from Duane Reade (some drugstore picks, perhaps?), the former "Grey's Anatomy" star was snapped by a paparazzo. The drugstore jumped on the opportunity by tweeting the pic of the actress with the following caption: "Love a quick #DuaneReade run? Even @KatieHeigl can't resist shopping #NYC's favorite drugstore."

In response, Heigl proceeded to sue the drugstore for $6 million for misappropriation of her celebrity and false advertising. Duane Reade is too busy scrolling through their Twitter feed to release an official statement. The retailer proceeded to retweet (and later delete) a tweet from Piers Morgan that read: "Hi @DuaneReade - unlike @KatieHeigl, I am very happy to be photographed coming out of your excellent stores. And feel free to tweet it." We'll add, "#sorrynotsorry."