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

[Ray From Cleveland]

Sounds like you have a good relationship.

This guy obviously doesn't have a good relationship with his parents. This isn't throwing out a box of baseball cards, this is 14 boxes of personal property.

The parents took this guy in for nearly a year after his divorce. How is that not a good relationship? Sounds to me like the son is irresponsible, inconsiderate, and lazy. If you moved in with your parents, and had a lottery ticket worth $29,000 when your parents told you to get it out of the house, would you still leave it there knowing they might possibly throw it away?

 

[JoeB131]

The parents took this guy in for nearly a year after his divorce. How is that not a good relationship? Sounds to me like the son is irresponsible, inconsiderate, and lazy. If you moved in with your parents, and had a lottery ticket worth $29,000 when your parents told you to get it out of the house, would you still leave it there knowing they might possibly throw it away?

Well, no, I'd cash it in the day it won.

But that's not the point here, is it? They threw away his property because they didn't like it, not because he had carelessly left it behind. Sounds to me like they didn't respect his life choices...

They kind of sound like awful prudes, come to think of it.

 

[Likkmee]

Guy shoulda shot the bitches

News

FOX10 News Mobile Alabama, your trusted source for news covering the Alabama, Pensacola Florida and Mississippi Gulf Coast

www.fox10tv.com

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Well, no, I'd cash it in the day it won.

But that's not the point here, is it? They threw away his property because they didn't like it, not because he had carelessly left it behind. Sounds to me like they didn't respect his life choices...

They kind of sound like awful prudes, come to think of it.

No, they gave him a place to live for nearly a year. When he moved, they told him to make sure his porn goes with him. He asked his father to help him move the porn and his elderly father wanted nothing to do with it. So in spite, the ungrateful bastared moved and left the porn there, so they rightfully threw it out.

 

[Rigby5]

Well, no, I'd cash it in the day it won.

But that's not the point here, is it? They threw away his property because they didn't like it, not because he had carelessly left it behind. Sounds to me like they didn't respect his life choices...

They kind of sound like awful prudes, come to think of it.

No, they gave him a place to live for nearly a year. When he moved, they told him to make sure his porn goes with him. He asked his father to help him move the porn and his elderly father wanted nothing to do with it. So in spite, the ungrateful bastared moved and left the porn there, so they rightfully threw it out.

Why do you say "rightfully"?
It was not harming them.
It is not like they had to see or watch it.
There was no reason for the parents to throw it away.
If they wanted to insist it be gone, then you give the son an ultimatum with a deadline.
From what I read, they never did that.
The son never knew they were intending to throw it away.
If he asked for help moving it, then possibly he did not even have a car.
In which case there was no way for him to move it himself.
But if they had at least given an ultimatum, then he could have sold it.
To throw it away instead of selling it, just makes no sense.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Why do you say "rightfully"?
It was not harming them.
It is not like they had to see or watch it.
There was no reason for the parents to throw it away.
If they wanted to insist it be gone, then you give the son an ultimatum with a deadline.
From what I read, they never did that.
The son never knew they were intending to throw it away.
If he asked for help moving it, then possibly he did not even have a car.
In which case there was no way for him to move it himself.
But if they had at least given an ultimatum, then he could have sold it.
To throw it away instead of selling it, just makes no sense.

There are people who are disgusted by stuff like porn. I know my mother wouldn't allow that in her house. She's a very religious woman. You are looking at it from your own eyes instead of the eyes of other people. If he didn't have a car, how did he move his other belongings to his new residence in another state? This guy is 42 years old. By now he knows his parents pretty well. When he moved, he left it behind in spite of their demand he take his porn boxes with him. Obviously he didn't care that much about it.

 

[Rigby5]

Why do you say "rightfully"?
It was not harming them.
It is not like they had to see or watch it.
There was no reason for the parents to throw it away.
If they wanted to insist it be gone, then you give the son an ultimatum with a deadline.
From what I read, they never did that.
The son never knew they were intending to throw it away.
If he asked for help moving it, then possibly he did not even have a car.
In which case there was no way for him to move it himself.
But if they had at least given an ultimatum, then he could have sold it.
To throw it away instead of selling it, just makes no sense.

There are people who are disgusted by stuff like porn. I know my mother wouldn't allow that in her house. She's a very religious woman. You are looking at it from your own eyes instead of the eyes of other people. If he didn't have a car, how did he move his other belongings to his new residence in another state? This guy is 42 years old. By now he knows his parents pretty well. When he moved, he left it behind in spite of their demand he take his porn boxes with him. Obviously he didn't care that much about it.

There are no religions I know of that have any value reason to be against porn.
Sex certainly can never be considered bad.
It is central to survival of the species.
The fact religions add marriage on top of sex, to make for longer lasting and stable relations, does nothing to condemn porn.
Your mother allows porn in her house because she allows the internet.
Anyone can watch porn in her house if they want and have a connection.

If he did not have a car, he could have moved his clothes with a backpack, on mass transit.
Most people in places like NYC do not have cars, and instead rely on mass transit.

Since he seems to think it was worth $29k, then he obviously must have cared a great deal about it.
And the parents should have cared about the $29k value even if they were disgusted by it.

There are lots of things that could be disgusting but that you do not throw away, because they may be valuable.
The question is whether or not the parent first exhausted all possible means of getting it out of their house. And I doubt that, since they could easily have just sold it and given the son the proceeds.
Sounds to me they deliberately wanted to take value away from him as punishment. And that is illegal.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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

Of course not, and thank God for it. This guy does NOT sound like God's Gift to Women.

I'm not having a lot of trouble guessing why this guy ended up divorced.

 

[Cecilie1200]

However, the rule for parents should be, you do not have the right to throw away or destroy anything belonging to your child.

My mother used to destroy my things. It was the most traumatic thing she ever did to me.

When my daughter was still a minor, I finally had to institute a "bring something into my house that's against my rules, it's toast" rule, because her grandmother was constantly buying her things I told her she couldn't have, like clothing that I considered inappropriate for a teenager. I don't allow that "Well, I'll just ask Grandma for it" crap. Fortunately, I never had to actually follow through on the rule, because my daughter and mother knew I WOULD follow through on it if she pushed me.

Just for the record, I found raising a girl to be more trouble than both of her brothers combined, bless her little heart.

 

[Cecilie1200]

However, the rule for parents should be, you do not have the right to throw away or destroy anything belonging to your child.

My mother used to destroy my things. It was the most traumatic thing she ever did to me.

Actually parents have that right over their minor children. His parents forgot that even if he was living under their roof, that they no longer had parental control over him.

No, but they do have a certain amount of ownership control over their house. I don't think they were correct in destroying his property, though; the correct response was, "Either respect our rules, or don't let the door hit you."

 

[Cecilie1200]

Well, no, I'd cash it in the day it won.

But that's not the point here, is it? They threw away his property because they didn't like it, not because he had carelessly left it behind. Sounds to me like they didn't respect his life choices...

They kind of sound like awful prudes, come to think of it.

No, they gave him a place to live for nearly a year. When he moved, they told him to make sure his porn goes with him. He asked his father to help him move the porn and his elderly father wanted nothing to do with it. So in spite, the ungrateful bastared moved and left the porn there, so they rightfully threw it out.

Where'd you see that in the story?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I am delighted to see that the United States judicial system is being used for a case as noble as this... an adult man who moved back in with his parents after his wife divorced him suing them for destroying his $29,000.00 in pornography he left behind when he moved out... I'll bet the holiday get gatherings will be a joy...

The judge should have thrown this shit out of court.

Want to bet on why he got a divorce?

$29,000.00 worth of porn...

He also sounds like a spoiled, entitled ass.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

There are no religions I know of that have any value reason to be against porn.
Sex certainly can never be considered bad.
It is central to survival of the species.
The fact religions add marriage on top of sex, to make for longer lasting and stable relations, does nothing to condemn porn.
Your mother allows porn in her house because she allows the internet.
Anyone can watch porn in her house if they want and have a connection.

If he did not have a car, he could have moved his clothes with a backpack, on mass transit.
Most people in places like NYC do not have cars, and instead rely on mass transit.

Since he seems to think it was worth $29k, then he obviously must have cared a great deal about it.
And the parents should have cared about the $29k value even if they were disgusted by it.

There are lots of things that could be disgusting but that you do not throw away, because they may be valuable.
The question is whether or not the parent first exhausted all possible means of getting it out of their house. And I doubt that, since they could easily have just sold it and given the son the proceeds.
Sounds to me they deliberately wanted to take value away from him as punishment. And that is illegal.

There is nothing illegal about it. Nobody has the right to force you to store their belongings, especially if you find those items revolting. While we don't know the exact exchange between this guy and his parents, what we do know is they demanded he take his porn with him and he didn't. This guy didn't have a car and moved everything he owned in a backpack on mass transit to another state? If he couldn't afford a car, and had nearly 30K in porn, right there it tells you this guy is a loser. If that's all he had, then it also tells us his parents were letting him stay there with no rent, and he didn't have a job either.

I was raised as a Catholic, went to private Catholic school, and even an altar boy. I can tell you without a doubt that the religion finds porn as an abomination to God. Sex in that religion is private, and to only take place between married couples. Having sex outside of marriage is considered a mortal sin.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Where'd you see that in the story?

It wasn't in the OP. Progressive Hunter posted a video with more information on what happened. It's in post 151.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, but they do have a certain amount of ownership control over their house. I don't think they were correct in destroying his property, though; the correct response was, "Either respect our rules, or don't let the door hit you."

He was already moved out when they threw it away.

 

[JoeB131]

No, they gave him a place to live for nearly a year. When he moved, they told him to make sure his porn goes with him. He asked his father to help him move the porn and his elderly father wanted nothing to do with it. So in spite, the ungrateful bastared moved and left the porn there, so they rightfully threw it out.

Again, we don't know what the relationship was, but a judge who heard the facts found against the parents.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, they gave him a place to live for nearly a year. When he moved, they told him to make sure his porn goes with him. He asked his father to help him move the porn and his elderly father wanted nothing to do with it. So in spite, the ungrateful bastared moved and left the porn there, so they rightfully threw it out.

Again, we don't know what the relationship was, but a judge who heard the facts found against the parents.

The judge is wrong. Nobody has the right to keep their belongings on your property. An appeals judge will overturn this in a minute, especially since this judge viewed it from a landlord/ tenant perspective.

 

[Cecilie1200]

No, they gave him a place to live for nearly a year. When he moved, they told him to make sure his porn goes with him. He asked his father to help him move the porn and his elderly father wanted nothing to do with it. So in spite, the ungrateful bastared moved and left the porn there, so they rightfully threw it out.

Again, we don't know what the relationship was, but a judge who heard the facts found against the parents.

The judge is wrong. Nobody has the right to keep their belongings on your property. An appeals judge will overturn this in a minute, especially since this judge viewed it from a landlord/ tenant perspective.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if a tenant basically abandons his belongings on your property, doesn't it legally become yours after a certain period of time if he doesn't reclaim it? You're the one who actually has rental properties, so I figure you would know.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if a tenant basically abandons his belongings on your property, doesn't it legally become yours after a certain period of time if he doesn't reclaim it? You're the one who actually has rental properties, so I figure you would know.

It depends on the state I guess. My state and Michigan (where this all took place) has no laws about abandoned property. Years ago my lawyer told me I have to keep the property in the apartment as long as rent is still being paid. Sort of like if somebody pays me for the month of December, but moves out right after Christmas, I cannot touch their property until January 1st. After that, I can do as I please with it unless the former tenant and I made a friendly agreement.

This past summer one of my tenants moved out several months after his divorce, and he left everything behind except his personal belongings. He moved to a friends apartment who he was in a band with, and of course his friend had furniture and appliances already, so there was no room for his stuff. One of my other tenants wanted his apartment so I gave it to her. She kept some of it, but I threw out everything else, and kept his deposit for moving all that stuff to the curb, some minor damage, and a lot of cleaning, particularly the bathroom. His wife was clean, but this guy was pretty much a pig. He never tried to get his deposit back because he knew what he left behind.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if a tenant basically abandons his belongings on your property, doesn't it legally become yours after a certain period of time if he doesn't reclaim it? You're the one who actually has rental properties, so I figure you would know.

It depends on the state I guess. My state and Michigan (where this all took place) has no laws about abandoned property. Years ago my lawyer told me I have to keep the property in the apartment as long as rent is still being paid. Sort of like if somebody pays me for the month of December, but moves out right after Christmas, I cannot touch their property until January 1st. After that, I can do as I please with it unless the former tenant and I made a friendly agreement.

This past summer one of my tenants moved out several months after his divorce, and he left everything behind except his personal belongings. He moved to a friends apartment who he was in a band with, and of course his friend had furniture and appliances already, so there was no room for his stuff. One of my other tenants wanted his apartment so I gave it to her. She kept some of it, but I threw out everything else, and kept his deposit for moving all that stuff to the curb, some minor damage, and a lot of cleaning, particularly the bathroom. His wife was clean, but this guy was pretty much a pig. He never tried to get his deposit back because he knew what he left behind.

That's certainly how it works in Arizona, from the perspective of someone who's been a tenant several times. The landlord can't touch the stuff so long as the rent has been paid, but anything that's still in the unit after the rent runs out becomes the property of the landlord to do with as he pleases. Basically, the only right you have to the use of someone's property is what you've paid for.