Realistically, the guy may have a real claim that is worth a couple of thousand, but how much suffering is he actually enduring compared to how much he caused. What a shmuck. It’s not like he doesn’t have any pictures. Further, it could be possible he demanded the $48,000 to get the case out of small claims where he could use an attorney and do exactly what has occurred. Punish through litigation.

The suit is not frivolous as the to cause of action. The prayer for damages other than the cost of the service is doubtful, but even then, has some basis in the equitable remedy of “specific performance,” which asserts when the lawful remedy of money damages is not adequate, then the Plaintiff should get what he contracted for.

The word “deserves” here must be applied as judiciously as any other word. Mr. Remis, presumably, filed a proper claim asserting all the elements necessary to allege a breach of contract. It’s fairly apparent, even at this state, to anticipate some liability against the photographer from the allegations that several important moments of the wedding were not photographed.

Some civil actions (class actions, especially) are “bifurcated” into two phases: first phase is the proof of liability; second phase is the calculation of damages. Mr. Remis has a good case on liability and damages. His case is not frivolous in the legal sense. His request for the equitable remedy is not even frivolous because there is common law to support it and the facts, until determined by the bench or a jury, are disputed.

What prevents most of these cases from consuming the court is that no attorney would spend much time seeking damages he knows a court will not award.