Son wins US lawsuit against parents who threw out his porn collection

[Pogo]

The man has a right to sue his parents but it wasn't right for him to sue his parents.

Wait'll he sees their will, where they leave him all their bills.

 

[Pogo]

Shoulda told him to leave with his precious collection.

Here's a thought.

If this enormous box of porn is worth $27k (which I doubt but if) --- why couldn't he afford to rent his own place?

Maybe the parents should countersue him for $27,000 in back rent.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

A man who sued his parents for getting rid of his pornography collection has won a lawsuit in western Michigan and can seek compensation. The US district judge Paul Maloney ruled in favour of David Werking, who said his parents had no right to throw out his collection. He lived at their Grand Haven home for 10 months after a divorce before moving to Muncie, Indiana.

Werking said boxes of films and magazines worth an estimated $29,000 (£21,500) were missing. “There is no question that the destroyed property was David’s property,” Maloney said. “Defendants repeatedly admitted that they destroyed the property.”

Werking’s parents said they had a right to act as his landlords. “Defendants do not cite to any statute or case law to support their assertion that landlords can destroy property that they dislike,” the judge said.

Son wins US lawsuit after parents destroy his porn collection

David Werking can seek damages after parents got rid of films and magazines worth $29,000

www.theguardian.com

While I admit the parents should have never thrown away this guys property, isn't he being a little ungrateful for them taking him in for nearly a year during a time of need, and then suing them in court? While the parents could have told him to find a different place for his porn, he should know his parents well enough to anticipate their rejection of his hobby. What I don't understand is a porn collection. 30 years ago? Yeah, perhaps, but who collects porn these days when we all have access to the internet and can watch or see just about anything we want?

Pay the pervert and kick him out

 

[Pogo]

A man who sued his parents for getting rid of his pornography collection has won a lawsuit in western Michigan and can seek compensation. The US district judge Paul Maloney ruled in favour of David Werking, who said his parents had no right to throw out his collection. He lived at their Grand Haven home for 10 months after a divorce before moving to Muncie, Indiana.

Werking said boxes of films and magazines worth an estimated $29,000 (£21,500) were missing. “There is no question that the destroyed property was David’s property,” Maloney said. “Defendants repeatedly admitted that they destroyed the property.”

Werking’s parents said they had a right to act as his landlords. “Defendants do not cite to any statute or case law to support their assertion that landlords can destroy property that they dislike,” the judge said.

Son wins US lawsuit after parents destroy his porn collection

David Werking can seek damages after parents got rid of films and magazines worth $29,000

www.theguardian.com

While I admit the parents should have never thrown away this guys property, isn't he being a little ungrateful for them taking him in for nearly a year during a time of need, and then suing them in court? While the parents could have told him to find a different place for his porn, he should know his parents well enough to anticipate their rejection of his hobby. What I don't understand is a porn collection. 30 years ago? Yeah, perhaps, but who collects porn these days when we all have access to the internet and can watch or see just about anything we want?

Please tell me this is supposed to be a joke.

Why did the freak have $30,000 worth of porn anyway?

I'm guessing maybe he runs the Fantasy Island porn store, next to Four Seasons Total Landscaping.

Hey, you need capital for a small business.

 

[Turtlesoup]

I have to ask whether the man has time for real sex when he devotes so much time looking at porn.

Sure explains why he was getting a divorce....

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

A man who sued his parents for getting rid of his pornography collection has won a lawsuit in western Michigan and can seek compensation. The US district judge Paul Maloney ruled in favour of David Werking, who said his parents had no right to throw out his collection. He lived at their Grand Haven home for 10 months after a divorce before moving to Muncie, Indiana.

Werking said boxes of films and magazines worth an estimated $29,000 (£21,500) were missing. “There is no question that the destroyed property was David’s property,” Maloney said. “Defendants repeatedly admitted that they destroyed the property.”

Werking’s parents said they had a right to act as his landlords. “Defendants do not cite to any statute or case law to support their assertion that landlords can destroy property that they dislike,” the judge said.

Son wins US lawsuit after parents destroy his porn collection

David Werking can seek damages after parents got rid of films and magazines worth $29,000

www.theguardian.com

While I admit the parents should have never thrown away this guys property, isn't he being a little ungrateful for them taking him in for nearly a year during a time of need, and then suing them in court? While the parents could have told him to find a different place for his porn, he should know his parents well enough to anticipate their rejection of his hobby. What I don't understand is a porn collection. 30 years ago? Yeah, perhaps, but who collects porn these days when we all have access to the internet and can watch or see just about anything we want?

Pay the pervert and kick him out

Plus he better pray he doesn't get into a homeless situation in the future, because his parents house will be off limits from this point on.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Here's a thought.

If this enormous box of porn is worth $27k (which I doubt but if) --- why couldn't he afford to rent his own place?

Maybe the parents should countersue him for $27,000 in back rent.

If he didn't spend that 29K on porn, he would have way more than enough money to get an apartment for himself. Divorce takes time, plenty of time to make arrangements on what you have to do to get a place of your own.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Things might get better if less women had kids. Less. Alot less abortions, more higher paying job vacancies. Would the nation grow stronger? Quite a question.

"Alot" is not a word, thank you!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Shoulda told him to leave with his precious collection.

Yep, but instead they choose to destroy his property.

No, it wasn't right, but on the other hand he should have considered his parents were going out of their way to help him out. It's not like he lived there for a few weeks until he could get on his feet. He lived there for 10 months.

Maybe it's kind of like that situation where your friend tells you he's desperate for money, and after you give it to him, he takes a Hawaiian vacation. The parents discovered this massive amount of porn, and asked themselves "WTF are we supporting this guy when he has money to blow on this shit?"

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You need to explain how government has the right to make such a law. Telling people what they have to accept on their own property.

All they have to do is pass the law, just like they passed the law for CCW's in my state. Even without the law, I have no right to tell my tenants they can't have a gun, or anything legal that doesn't harm my rental unit or disturb neighbors or other tenants.

You don't think having a weapon capable of accidentally killing somebody in the next apartment isn't potentially harmful?

That's none of his business, is it?

 

[Pogo]

A man who sued his parents for getting rid of his pornography collection has won a lawsuit in western Michigan and can seek compensation. The US district judge Paul Maloney ruled in favour of David Werking, who said his parents had no right to throw out his collection. He lived at their Grand Haven home for 10 months after a divorce before moving to Muncie, Indiana.

Werking said boxes of films and magazines worth an estimated $29,000 (£21,500) were missing. “There is no question that the destroyed property was David’s property,” Maloney said. “Defendants repeatedly admitted that they destroyed the property.”

Werking’s parents said they had a right to act as his landlords. “Defendants do not cite to any statute or case law to support their assertion that landlords can destroy property that they dislike,” the judge said.

Son wins US lawsuit after parents destroy his porn collection

David Werking can seek damages after parents got rid of films and magazines worth $29,000

www.theguardian.com

While I admit the parents should have never thrown away this guys property, isn't he being a little ungrateful for them taking him in for nearly a year during a time of need, and then suing them in court? While the parents could have told him to find a different place for his porn, he should know his parents well enough to anticipate their rejection of his hobby. What I don't understand is a porn collection. 30 years ago? Yeah, perhaps, but who collects porn these days when we all have access to the internet and can watch or see just about anything we want?

Pay the pervert and kick him out

Plus he better pray he doesn't get into a homeless situation in the future, because his parents house will be off limits from this point on.

Besides, it's got no porn in it any more.

 

[Pogo]

Things might get better if less women had kids. Less. Alot less abortions, more higher paying job vacancies. Would the nation grow stronger? Quite a question.

"Alot" is not a word, thank you!

You're not gonna bust him for "less abortions" and "less women"??

You looked right PAST them.

 

[Pogo]

You need to explain how government has the right to make such a law. Telling people what they have to accept on their own property.

All they have to do is pass the law, just like they passed the law for CCW's in my state. Even without the law, I have no right to tell my tenants they can't have a gun, or anything legal that doesn't harm my rental unit or disturb neighbors or other tenants. My only concern is they live here clean, in peace, within the law, and return my property they way they found it.

Of course you do.

We did it in one place I lived --- found out my roommate had a 'piece' so we evicted him and rewrote the lease for future renters.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Shoulda told him to leave with his precious collection.

Yep, but instead they choose to destroy his property.

No, it wasn't right, but on the other hand he should have considered his parents were going out of their way to help him out. It's not like he lived there for a few weeks until he could get on his feet. He lived there for 10 months.

Maybe it's kind of like that situation where your friend tells you he's desperate for money, and after you give it to him, he takes a Hawaiian vacation. The parents discovered this massive amount of porn, and asked themselves "WTF are we supporting this guy when he has money to blow on this shit?"

There is no "but on the other hand."

They should not have destroyed his property.

/thread

 

[Pogo]

A man who sued his parents for getting rid of his pornography collection has won a lawsuit in western Michigan and can seek compensation. The US district judge Paul Maloney ruled in favour of David Werking, who said his parents had no right to throw out his collection. He lived at their Grand Haven home for 10 months after a divorce before moving to Muncie, Indiana.

Werking said boxes of films and magazines worth an estimated $29,000 (£21,500) were missing. “There is no question that the destroyed property was David’s property,” Maloney said. “Defendants repeatedly admitted that they destroyed the property.”

Werking’s parents said they had a right to act as his landlords. “Defendants do not cite to any statute or case law to support their assertion that landlords can destroy property that they dislike,” the judge said.

Son wins US lawsuit after parents destroy his porn collection

David Werking can seek damages after parents got rid of films and magazines worth $29,000

www.theguardian.com

While I admit the parents should have never thrown away this guys property, isn't he being a little ungrateful for them taking him in for nearly a year during a time of need, and then suing them in court? While the parents could have told him to find a different place for his porn, he should know his parents well enough to anticipate their rejection of his hobby. What I don't understand is a porn collection. 30 years ago? Yeah, perhaps, but who collects porn these days when we all have access to the internet and can watch or see just about anything we want?

I'd like to have seen the trial where the defense asked "where is the evidence?"

Because if it's tossed, how does the court know it existed, and in the value claimed?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Of course you do.

We did it in one place I lived --- found out my roommate had a 'piece' so we evicted him and rewrote the lease for future renters.

A roommate is different. As a landlord, I'm forbidden by law from forbidding guns in my rental units.

 

[Pogo]

Shoulda told him to leave with his precious collection.

Yep, but instead they choose to destroy his property.

No, it wasn't right, but on the other hand he should have considered his parents were going out of their way to help him out. It's not like he lived there for a few weeks until he could get on his feet. He lived there for 10 months.

Maybe it's kind of like that situation where your friend tells you he's desperate for money, and after you give it to him, he takes a Hawaiian vacation. The parents discovered this massive amount of porn, and asked themselves "WTF are we supporting this guy when he has money to blow on this shit?"

There is no "but on the other hand."

They should not have destroyed his property.

/thread

Even if he was paying rent and his parents were his landlords, you can't destroy someones property. Just ask Judge Judy.

It doesn't say they "destroyed" it -- says they "threw it out".

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I'd like to have seen the trial where the defense asked "where is the evidence?"

Because if it's tossed, how does the court know it existed, and in the value claimed?

It's in the OP. They admitted to getting rid of it. Then they told the judge they had every right to because they were acting as his landlord. The court said there is no law that permits a landlord to throw away the property of a tenant.

 

[Pogo]

Of course you do.

We did it in one place I lived --- found out my roommate had a 'piece' so we evicted him and rewrote the lease for future renters.

A roommate is different. As a landlord, I'm forbidden by law from forbidding guns in my rental units.

That's what I mean. The landlord re-wrote the lease so as to exclude any guns in future tenants. It was just something that had never occurred to us or it would have been in the lease language from the start.

What law prevents you from forbidding guns on your own property?

 

[Pogo]

I'd like to have seen the trial where the defense asked "where is the evidence?"

Because if it's tossed, how does the court know it existed, and in the value claimed?

It's in the OP. They admitted to getting rid of it. Then they told the judge they had every right to because they were acting as his landlord. The court said there is no law that permits a landlord to throw away the property of a tenant.

Sure, they admitted to getting rid of it, but how does the plaintiff prove what "it" was?

He's claiming what, 27, 29 thousand bucks value? That kind of claim needs some justification.