Ex-Husband Sues Wedding Photog 6 years later

Discussion in 'News' started by james_r|2, Nov 2, 2011.

  1. Talk about buyer's remorse...
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/nyregion/suit-against-photographer-seeks-re-creation-of-wedding-after-divorce.html?_r=1&hp
     
  2. In most states, the statute of limitations on civil suits is two years. I don't see this going very far before it's tossed out altogether. Are you sure this isn't a setup for yet another lame reality TV show?
     
  3. @William: According to the NYT story, the suit was filed just before the statute of limitations deadline.
     
  4. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45144944/ns/us_news-life/
    this looks like the story
    " cheaper to keep her"
    I have been married 51 years
     
  5. The statute of limitations vary from state to state. In some cases it could be 7 years or more. Creditor disputes can be up to 3 years, but some business-friendly states can double that and even longer. Another Pie in the face for wedding photographers.
     
  6. Unlike the majority (at least the ones we read about) of these lawsuits - on the surface this appears to be against a reputable firm and a photographer that has a few years in the business.
    This seems to be an ex-husband searching for money - any way he can get it... I know if I were to get a divorce - the last thing I'd want to do is recreate the photos from the wedding.
     
  7. "Mr. Remis, who said at his deposition that he has not been employed since 2008,"
    This tells me everything I need to know about why he is suing.
     
  8. The matter could have been initiated regardless of the employment situation, therefore, it tells us little.

    In any event, this is an aberration which is why it is in the news. The guy is not going to get both a refund and a
    reshoot. It's good to have your contracts reviewed as to whether the limitation of remedies for breach is adequate. A
    limit to just a refund for example. This is why you spend a little more money to have a pro reviewed contract and be
    insured rather than get crappy contracts online. On the lark you get a rare instance of something like this or actually
    screw up a shoot.
     
  9. Maybe incorporate, "Jamees R Incorporated. The couple has to file against the corporation and you won't have to sell your house, the cars, and perhaps the kids!

    Check with your state. I'd ask the state if you are sued as a corporation can the people sue you outside of the corporation. If they sue as a corporation you may be able to file bankruptcy. Who knows for sure until you ask a lawyer.

    I could be totally wrong but it's surely something to find out about.

    Maybe this client is a laywer, or someone in the family is. This is pretty weird.

    Keep us posted. Hopefully the case is too old to file.
     
  10. Quote"Mr. Remis’s lawyer works for Goodwin Procter, where Mr. Remis’s father, Shepard M. Remis, is a litigation partner."end quote.
    Looks to me that it's somewhat a family related / contributed thing.
     
  11. I'm a bit surprised. Goodwin Procter is a very good firm, and there's a lot not to like in the plaintiff's case. Even if he is the son of a partner - his dad should be advising him to be reasonable and his lawyer should be concerned about sanctions. I have strong doubts that a NY court would be persuaded that a total do-over of a wedding is an appropriate remedy for missing two photos, especially considering how many extraneous factors weigh against that outcome:
    -They're divorced. How much value can those photos actually have to anybody?
    -They don't know where to find the bride and how to get her to participate.
    -And it's just not reasonable.
    My guess would be that the guy expected a quick settlement, but now that everybody's in the hole for attorney fees he can't just drop it, and a lot of the motivation here has to be emotional.
     
  12. Walter Degroot , Nov 03, 2011; 09:26 a.m.
    "I have been married 51 years"
    Congrads!
     

Share This Page