US judge says parents owe son over trashed porn collection

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,357
8,444
126
beasties_couch.jpg.6b2d7910e17b66200b96a57e8ceb757a.jpg

David Werking, who was living with his parents following a divorce, sued them over the items, which he claims were worth over $25,000 (£18,500).
His parents argued that they told Mr Werking to not bring the items home.
The judge said that, even as landlords, Mr Werking's parents had no right to dispose of items owned by their son.

 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,224
5,800
126
1) WhoTF pays for Porn[/obligatory]
2) WhoTF destroys their 4x Year Old childrens Porn?

This Family fails in everything.
 

WelshBloke

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
31,408
9,299
136
2) WhoTF destroys their 4x Year Old childrens Porn?

Awhile after I moved out of home my parents trashed about £3k worth of comics that I had.
Not that they were being arses about it but to them it was just a bunch of old newspapers taking up room in their home and I absolutely see their point.
 

Red Squirrel

No Lifer
May 24, 2003
68,413
12,593
126
www.anyf.ca
I have mixed feelings on this one. I kinda side with the "kid" tbh. So he's in a tough situation in life and had to go live with his parents in his 40's, that alone has got to suck and is not ideal. But then to have your parents go through your personal stuff and start throwing stuff out? They had no business doing that imo. I get the "our house our rules" thing, but clearly this did not work in their favour here.
 

Jeeebus

Diamond Member
Aug 29, 2006
9,179
897
126
This isn't particularly surprising - it's only really 'newsworthy' due to the nature of what was thrown out. I'm not bothering to look up the law in the state where this happened, but I'm assuming it's much the same as Florida (where I am)... i.e., highly protective of tenant rights. There are specific procedures (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ng=&URL=0700-0799/0715/Sections/0715.104.html) that must be followed with respect to tossing or selling tenant property after the tenant moves out (unless you have a written lease agreement that says you can just throw the stuff away (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes...ing=&URL=0000-0099/0083/Sections/0083.67.html). They didn't follow that procedure.

What I'm curious about is whether this guy was actually a "tenant" meaning that he was obligated to pay rent. If they weren't charging rent, he wouldn't be a tenant under Florida law but a house guest. It's too early in the morning for me to figure out whether the landlord/tenant rules still apply regarding throwing a guest's stuff away rather than a tenant's stuff.

I don't fully understand the article saying it's the parents' responsibility to figure out the value of what was thrown out. The son was the plaintiff. It was his job to establish value, and I don't see how he could do that absent some expert testimony which I suspect was not provided. That the son thought his collection to be priceless is irrelevant - the question is what was the fair market value of his collection at the time of disposal, and I seriously doubt the son was qualified to provide that testimony.
 

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
64,137
12,456
136
This isn't particularly surprising - it's only really 'newsworthy' due to the nature of what was thrown out. I'm not bothering to look up the law in the state where this happened, but I'm assuming it's much the same as Florida (where I am)... i.e., highly protective of tenant rights. There are specific procedures (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ng=&URL=0700-0799/0715/Sections/0715.104.html) that must be followed with respect to tossing or selling tenant property after the tenant moves out (unless you have a written lease agreement that says you can just throw the stuff away (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes...ing=&URL=0000-0099/0083/Sections/0083.67.html). They didn't follow that procedure.

What I'm curious about is whether this guy was actually a "tenant" meaning that he was obligated to pay rent. If they weren't charging rent, he wouldn't be a tenant under Florida law but a house guest. It's too early in the morning for me to figure out whether the landlord/tenant rules still apply regarding throwing a guest's stuff away rather than a tenant's stuff.

I don't fully understand the article saying it's the parents' responsibility to figure out the value of what was thrown out. The son was the plaintiff. It was his job to establish value, and I don't see how he could do that absent some expert testimony which I suspect was not provided. That the son thought his collection to be priceless is irrelevant - the question is what was the fair market value of his collection at the time of disposal, and I seriously doubt the son was qualified to provide that testimony.

Is there a deduction from the value for pages stuck together...or can he claim it artistic and therefore raises the market value? We should ask Shorty...
 
  • Haha
Reactions: pcgeek11

Matt390

Member
Jun 7, 2019
144
62
101
This isn't particularly surprising - it's only really 'newsworthy' due to the nature of what was thrown out. I'm not bothering to look up the law in the state where this happened, but I'm assuming it's much the same as Florida (where I am)... i.e., highly protective of tenant rights. There are specific procedures (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ng=&URL=0700-0799/0715/Sections/0715.104.html) that must be followed with respect to tossing or selling tenant property after the tenant moves out (unless you have a written lease agreement that says you can just throw the stuff away (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes...ing=&URL=0000-0099/0083/Sections/0083.67.html). They didn't follow that procedure.

What I'm curious about is whether this guy was actually a "tenant" meaning that he was obligated to pay rent. If they weren't charging rent, he wouldn't be a tenant under Florida law but a house guest. It's too early in the morning for me to figure out whether the landlord/tenant rules still apply regarding throwing a guest's stuff away rather than a tenant's stuff.

I don't fully understand the article saying it's the parents' responsibility to figure out the value of what was thrown out. The son was the plaintiff. It was his job to establish value, and I don't see how he could do that absent some expert testimony which I suspect was not provided. That the son thought his collection to be priceless is irrelevant - the question is what was the fair market value of his collection at the time of disposal, and I seriously doubt the son was qualified to provide that testimony.


You can be a tenant without paying rent in florida.
 

BarkingGhostar

Diamond Member
Nov 20, 2009
8,409
1,617
136
If he was warned ahead of time and violated that warning then I do not get the legal conclusion. Seems like the son and judge need to get bent.
 

BarkingGhostar

Diamond Member
Nov 20, 2009
8,409
1,617
136
As a mod can't you scour the IP addresses and using geoip.com determine their Michigan-ness to get a Top Ten most likely candidates?
 

UsandThem

Elite Member
May 4, 2000
16,068
7,380
146
As a mod can't you scour the IP addresses and using geoip.com determine their Michigan-ness to get a Top Ten most likely candidates?
That's too easy.

It's more satisfying letting them get paranoid, and flushing themselves out. ;)

Wresting what is going on.gif
 

Matt390

Member
Jun 7, 2019
144
62
101
If he was warned ahead of time and violated that warning then I do not get the legal conclusion. Seems like the son and judge need to get bent.


He's an adult. Imagine if your landlord just destroyed your property. It doesnt matter if he told you you couldn't bring it. Unless it was damaging the property or posed a serious danger, they cant just destroy it.
 

Torn Mind

Lifer
Nov 25, 2012
11,878
2,712
136
If the conditions of violating the law are met, the judge can rule that it was violated.

It is fallacious to disregard a potential violation merely because the contents themselves are rather shocking.

In the back dealings and stuff, the practice of law is full of 4D-chess. But once the courtroom case is heard, it is very reductionist.
 

UsandThem

Elite Member
May 4, 2000
16,068
7,380
146
He's an adult. Imagine if your landlord just destroyed your property. It doesnt matter if he told you you couldn't bring it. Unless it was damaging the property or posed a serious danger, they cant just destroy it.
That's modern thinking. I'm old school "be a big boy and get your own place if you don't like it" crowd.

If it's my house, and I'm letting them live there free of charge, it my way or the highway once they hit 18. If they don't don't like the rules, they can get their own place and pay their own rent. If they sued me, they'd be out on their butts.
 

Torn Mind

Lifer
Nov 25, 2012
11,878
2,712
136
That's modern thinking. I'm old school "be a big boy and get your own place if you don't like it" crowd.

If it's my house, and I'm letting them live there free of charge, it my way or the highway once they hit 18. If they don't don't like the rules, they can get their own place and pay their own rent. If they sued me, they'd be out on their butts.
If the parents were charging him money to live there, by definition, it is a landlord-tenant relationship and that is all that matters in matters of law. What gets coded into paper is the law, and with no written exceptions the parents are on the hook for their behavior even if they have moral or ethical justifications.

The judge simply cannot dismiss the case on such grounds.

Now, just winning the judgment is the first step. He then has to garnish his parents' assets because I doubt they are willingly just going to give him the money.