Pennsylvania Record

Sunday, October 20, 2019

Victim of hairstyling injury opposes argument her claims are barred by Pa. state laws

By Nicholas Malfitano | May 1, 2017

PHILADELPHIA – A woman who is suing her hairstylist and his employer for supposedly injuring her during the application of a hairstyle known as a “quick-weave”, opposes his claims that she knew the risks of such a procedure and that her case is barred by Pennsylvania laws.

Khadijah Sangare of Drexel Hill filed suit on Feb. 22 in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, against Hair Cuttery and Travis Wilcox of Upper Darby, plus Creative Hairdressers, Inc. of Arlington, Va. and Ratner Companies of Falls Church, Va. (both trading as Hair Cuttery).

“[On] March 10, 2015, plaintiff called the salon to speak to defendant Wilcox, a hairstylist employed by the salon who had previously provided hairstyle services to plaintiff. Plaintiff asked if defendant Wilcox had ever performed a hairstyle called a quick-weave. Defendant Wilcox stated that he had experience with applying quick-weaves and would be happy to do one for plaintiff,” the litigation states.

“On March 10, 2015, Mr. Wilcox applied the quick-weave to plaintiff’s head. The process required Mr. Wilcox to braid plaintiff’s hair in corn rows and place a stocking cap over the braids. The stocking cap was then sewn directly onto the braids. During the application, Mr. Wilcox failed to cut pressure gaps into the elastic band of the stocking cap, which resulted in the band being far too tight, resulting in serious and permanent damages to plaintiff,” the suit adds.

The plaintiff believes the defendant failed to use due care in applying the quick-weave, failing to create pressure gaps in the quick-weave, negligently attaching the quick-weave in a manner that caused harm and violating the duty of care owed to clients, including plaintiff.

The plaintiff says she suffered the following injuries in the incident: a 3x20 millimeter ellipse-shaped avulsion laceration of the forehead, headaches, neuropathy, permanent scarring, mental anguish and emotional distress. The plaintiff adds she has suffered economic losses for medical treatment.

In a new matter reply issued March 27, Wilcox said Sangare’s claims were barred by the Doctrine of Laches, the Fair Share Act and the Comparative Negligence Act, that her “unreasonable and unjustifiable delay in filing this action has prejudiced him with respect to the gathering of evidence” and that she assumed the risk of injury associated with the procedure, among other charges.

Sangare categorically denies all of Wilcox’s assertions, denying them as conclusions of law to which no response is required and strict proof is demanded.

For counts of negligence and vicarious liability, the plaintiff is seeking damages in excess of $50,000 in this matter.

The plaintiff is represented by Alison Russell of White & Williams, in Philadelphia.

The defendants are represented by Patricia J. Baxter and Meghan F. Henry of Morgan & Akins, also in Philadelphia.

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas case 170205291

From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at

Want to get notified whenever we write about Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas ?

Sign-up Next time we write about Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, we'll email you a link to the story. You may edit your settings or unsubscribe at any time.

Organizations in this Story

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas

More News