Porn Law Humor: Next Time, Maybe Rent a Storage Shed

Porn Law Humor: Next Time, Maybe Rent a Storage Shed.

Every day, all over the world, people file lawsuits against each other over one thing or another. From bogus slip n’ fall personal injury lawsuits to important cases involving major violations of civil and human rights, the world’s courtrooms are buzzing daily with more litigation than you can shake a gavel at.

With this much suing, countersuing, appealing and remanding going on, almost no legal action surprises Calico at this point. She wasn’t even surprised when a woman sued a jelly bean maker for failing to adequately explain that jelly beans have sugar in them.

Still, when Calico first heard of a certain lawsuit filed in Michigan a few years back, she was indeed surprised. She wasn’t surprised by the lawsuit, though; she was surprised that the defendants in the lawsuit had taken the actions that they did, surprised that the media seemed to think the plaintiff (who also happens to be their son) had no case and surprised that the defendants seemed to think that if you’re a landlord, that gives you the right to simply toss out your tenant’s things.

What did the court make of the lawsuit in question? What was the cause of action? How closely did the defendants inspect the items at issue in the case before deciding to dispose of them? How many volumes of University Co-Eds are there, anyway? Find out in Calico’s new post: “Next Time, Maybe Rent a Storage Shed.”

– Calico Rudasill, Sssh.com unique Porn Movies

Read on…

We live in a very litigious world, wherein people are constantly suing each other for something. 

The parties involved in this constant flood of litigation are as diverse as the lawsuits. Employees routinely sue their employers, celebrities routinely sue their plastic surgeons and Donald Trump routinely sues – and gets sued by – everyone.

Hell, sometimes people will even sue a four-year-old – which is odd, because even if a four-year-old has “deep pockets,” the only thing you’re going to find in those pockets is your missing scrunchie, or if you’re lucky, maybe a cool looking seashell.

In a world of constant litigation, it’s hard for any lawsuit to come as too much of a surprise, but if there’s a class of lawsuit that’s sure to make me shake my head, even if it fails to shock me, it’s the genre I’m going to call: 

“The Weird Family Lawsuit”

There’s nothing unusual about many lawsuits involving family members suing each other. People sue for divorce and custody all the time, of course, heirs sue each other over contentious division of their parents’ estates, family members who do business with each other can find themselves adversaries in court, etc.

When I talk about Weird Family Lawsuits, I mean stuff like children suing their parents just for giving birth to them and children suing for support after their parents have kicked them out of the house – that sort of thing.  

By far my favorite recent Weird Family Lawsuit is the one in which a guy in Michigan named David Werking sued his parents for destroying his collection of porn and sex toys. What part of this story do I love most? The outcome.

Sounds Like Someone Should Have Written “No Porn Storage” Into the Lease

While the lawsuit was initially treated as borderline frivolous by many in the media, the court saw things David’s way, with U.S. District Judge Paul Maloney ruling in his favor and, most recently, awarding David $30,441 – with another $14,500 due to his attorneys.

David’s parents tried to argue that as his de facto landlords, they were entitled to destroy his pleasure products, along with copies of adult film classics like University Co-Eds 25 and Lesbians in Tight Shorts. Judge Maloney was having none of it, however.

“There is no question that the destroyed property was David’s property,” Maloney noted in his decision. “Defendants repeatedly admitted that they destroyed the property.”

What the defendants didn’t do, the judge observed, was offer any support for their proposition that they could toss out his porn in their capacity as his landlord.

“Defendants do not cite to any statute or caselaw to support their assertion that landlords can destroy property that they dislike,” Maloney wrote.

And if You Let the Rent Lapse, Just Think of the “Storage Wars” Episode that Will Lead To!

As much as I like porn and support the right of everyone who wants to watch porn to go ahead and feast their eyes on the stuff, I can certainly understand why people who don’t like porn would prefer not to see it – or to occupy a significant portion of their home’s storage capacity, as the case may have been with the Werking household. Where David’s parents went wrong here was in thinking that destroying their son’s smut collection was the appropriate solution to their porn dilemma.

As I see it, this kind of thing is why storage sheds and rentable storage lockers were invented. Storage sheds and lockers provide a place for stuff that people can’t bring themselves to part with, but don’t want piled up in the basement – whether the stuff in question is their old bowling trophies, boxes of clothes they haven’t been able to fit in since the 90s or the entire collection of Ed Powers’ Dirty Debutantes on both VHS and DVD.

Sure, storage sheds and lockers cost money, particularly if you rent them month after month without a plan for ever getting your stuff out of them. But this lawsuit cost the Werkings over $45,000 – so unless they got stuck storing David’s personal adult shop inventory for several decades, they would have come out significantly better off than they did by purging David’s porn pile from the family abode.