absolutely, and sue any landlord that terminated her lease based on this (presumably that didn't happen either), the media outlets that repeatedly aired her image (presumably not suing them because her ambulance chasing lawyers courted those media outlets themselves and/or ZG received remuneration from those media outlets), sue the source that leaked this woman's address or image to the media in the first place, etc.
Meanwhile, in my opinion, the A's should be very careful to limit their statements to the fact that they don't believe the descriptions given to them by KC match this woman's appearance, that KC has not told them this woman is involved, and the fact that neither they nor KC ever gave this woman's image or address or particulars to the media or disseminated her image or made any accusation against this woman--they should not make any statements to the effect of "this is not the woman/this woman is not involved in Caylee's disappearance". They should not take that risk. What if there's a reason KC won't look at the picture and 'clear' this woman? The A's have no way of knowing.