So Much For That Father And Son Picnic Thing
Hey, I understand being pissed off if you loan money to a relative and if they don't pay it back. I mean I can't tell you how many times my mom has yelled at me for all the twenties I have stolen from her purse. It sucks for her and I do feel bad and one of these days I will put a few bucks back in there. Problem is my dad would probably just take it for himself and I wouldn't get any credit.
Richard Dreyfuss is suing his dad and his uncle because they borrowed $870,000 back in 1984 and haven't paid him back. Now, obviously it is more than $20, but I think he should let it go. Do I think it is ok for relatives to sue each other? Yep. The problem that I have with this whole thing is that Dreyfuss is 61 years old. So, giving a huge benefit of the doubt, lets say his dad had him at 20, then his dad is at least 81. Dreyfus' mom died about 8 years ago, so it is just dad living.
So, you are such a heartless guy that you are going after your old, widowed dad for money that you could make in a second if you decided to start acting again? OK, so maybe you are with Richard on this so far. Lets say dad and the equally old uncle need to cough up the money plus interest. Well, Richard doesn't think that is good enough. Nope, he is suing for punitive damages as well. He wants millions and millions of dollars in damages from them. Whether Richard is in the right on the suing, how can you sue your aging father for millions and millions. So, if Richard wins, is he going to enforce the judgment? Is he going to kick dad out of the family home? Is he going to stand on the roof and watch as his dad wheelchairs his way down the street?
What kind of guy would get any satisfaction out of that? The time to do this would have been 20 years ago. The loan was taken out in 1984. I would think by the early 90's you are going to have a pretty good sense if it is going to be paid back or not. Why wait until now? One of your ex-wives hitting you up for more support and so now you have to go kick the old man in the nuts to prove you are a man? Just give it up. You are an ass in all your films, don't be one in real life as well.
GUESS HE'S BROKE....
ReplyDeletejaws had it right the first time..
ReplyDeletelol jax...what a buttwad he is...
ReplyDeleteMr. Holland's Opus is a creepy fucking movie, too.
ReplyDeleteSounds like somebody's got daddy issues. If he read Dear Abby, he'd know that you never lend money to family if you want to get it back.
ReplyDeleteIsn't this a case where the statute of limitations would apply, and isn't that a 7 year time frame? Richard should have gotten his act together legally a long time ago on this one. I've never liked him, and now he doesn't sound too bright.
ReplyDeleteDoes seem pretty heartless to be going after someone that age.
We don't know the fully story, but it does seem a little nutty.
ReplyDeleteWhile I agreed with Ent.'s comment last week about letting $50,000 go, $870,000 is a different story. Loaning money to family can be dicey. Richard ain't the star he once thought he was and probably needs the moolah.
ReplyDeleteOr perhaps it's a friendly lawsuit, intended to prevent bill collectors from selling their home out from under them. If Dreyfuss gets a judgment, and takes ownership, they can stay, right?
ReplyDeletePersonally I don't see how old age should negate being responsible. WTF was the excuse 20 years ago? He was "old" then too.
ReplyDeleteDon't loan money to family.
Don't borrow money!
If you break these two rules there will be issues, but I'm going to side with the collector, I don't care how old the borrower is, or how old the debt. A debt is a debt.
age shouldn't nagte it but come on, where the hell is he going to get the cash? to us thats a shitlaod of money to Dreyfuss its not..but say it was...$5000 your dad owed you at 81 year sold. you gonna sue him? $5000 he does not have or the means to get. is it worth it? i'd say cut your losses and try to enjoy the time you have left cuz when the old guy goes and you're nickle and diming the funeral..you're gonna LOOK and FEEL like a prick!
ReplyDeletePerhaps if he gets a judgment he can attach the estate when his father dies, or if he gets a judgment he can use it to off set a tax bill. If the father and uncle don't have the means to repay the debt one of the above could mitigate damages. If they still own the real estate it could be worth it to sue.
ReplyDeleteHe should be paid back. Why should they get to keep nearly 1 million dollars they borrowed?
How much do you want to bet the father and uncle OWN the building for which Richard lent them money?
ReplyDeleteThey've refused to provide any financial statements... this is probably Richard's way of having the building left to him in the wills instead of various other relatives inheriting it.
Ignoring the legitimate scenario of Richard possibly protecting his dad and uncle from bill collectors or to simply guarantee that he inherits the building that they built the money with. I'm with Ent on this, because it's really not about the principle of paying back a debt anymore. It's about the simple logic.
ReplyDeleteI'll even go so far as to say that age doesn't even have anything to do with the argument. It's the simple fact that Richard's dad and uncle probably DON'T HAVE $870,000. They have no way of earning that, let alone the punitive damages, and if there was a way for them to start earning money odds are good that both of them are going to die before even 10% of that money has been earned. Richard will lose more money on lawyers and court costs than he will gain from winning, because he is just not going to get any money back.
So yeah, it's less about the fact that money is owed and more about the fact that this lawsuit is a waste of time on the part of everyone involved. Well, except for Richard's lawyers, who will be the only ones to even make any money from this.
Counter sue the ungrateful fucker for all the food he ate up until 18
ReplyDelete