DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Business of Photography >> Photog being sued to pay for re-created wedding
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 32, (reverse)
AuthorThread
11/04/2011 02:32:57 PM · #1
Unfrickin believable.

//www.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/nyregion/suit-against-photographer-seeks-re-creation-of-wedding-after-divorce.html?_r=1
11/04/2011 02:40:48 PM · #2
Poor guy, his wedding video is only 2 hours long? You have to feel his pain. If he ever figures out where his ex-wife is I hope he gets his dream and he gets to re-create his wedding, perhaps his former wife's current husband can give the bride away. What a hoot!
11/04/2011 02:40:54 PM · #3
Originally posted by snaffles:

Unfrickin believable.

//www.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/nyregion/suit-against-photographer-seeks-re-creation-of-wedding-after-divorce.html?_r=1


parsed
11/04/2011 02:44:29 PM · #4
Not quite sure how they are going to recreate the wedding without the bride... bizarre claim.
11/04/2011 03:25:45 PM · #5
Originally posted by lawrysimm:

Not quite sure how they are going to recreate the wedding without the bride... bizarre claim.


Well uhm the groom wants the photog to pay for all the principals to be flown back to the location for the reshoot...I assume she's one of them!!!

Message edited by author 2011-11-04 17:52:51.
11/04/2011 03:35:05 PM · #6
Perhaps the photographer can apply to the Kardashian Foundation for a grant to cover this ...
11/04/2011 03:40:30 PM · #7
I worked with a contractor is Boston who had an "underemployed lawyer" surcharge in all his contracts. If the client is a lawyer, or the child of a lawyer and seems to have too much time on their hands, you can expect some level of litigation before the contract is done. Plan accordingly.

The client here is a textbook case. the former groom has been unemployed for the last three years, and his daddy is a principle in a law firm, so it doesn't cost them anything to force the photographer to spend $50,000 to defend a suit arising out of a $4,000 job. Idle hands are the Devil's workshop, especially when they are lawyered up.
11/04/2011 03:51:47 PM · #8
Originally posted by BrennanOB:

... daddy is a principle in a law firm ...

Methinks this PRINCIPAL is lacking in principles ... ;-)

The photographer should consider counter-suing for both malicious litigation and slander -- if this is out on the 'net, the damage to his reputation could be considerable.
11/04/2011 05:14:40 PM · #9
This is the best quote from the whole story

“He wants to fly his ex-wife back and he doesn’t even know where she lives.”

Evidently his ex moved back to Latvia. Based on the way this clown is acting, I can see why.

Message edited by author 2011-11-04 17:14:53.
11/04/2011 05:48:52 PM · #10
Wow. Even moreso, the argument is that he missed the last 15 minutes.

And he expected a six hour video...if the wedding was six hours, then 15 minutes is very little of it.

And double wow...the legal defense is expected to cost $50K!

11/04/2011 05:52:02 PM · #11
Originally posted by Spork99:

This is the best quote from the whole story

“He wants to fly his ex-wife back and he doesn’t even know where she lives.”

Evidently his ex moved back to Latvia. Based on the way this clown is acting, I can see why.


Frankly if I were her, and got wind that this idiot wanted me back to re-create the wedding...well...I'd never leave the house and be spending my waking hours stuffing myself with potato muffins, so I couldn't fit back into the wedding dress!! :-)

ETA: Wonder what her real reaction to this situation would be. Creepy 101.

Message edited by author 2011-11-04 17:54:09.
11/04/2011 09:52:09 PM · #12
we really, really need to get common sense back into the courts.
11/04/2011 10:19:14 PM · #13
Originally posted by Neil:

And double wow...the legal defense is expected to cost $50K!

I know "people" the photog could hire for 1/10th of that to make this problem go away.
11/04/2011 10:21:11 PM · #14
I skimmed it earlier today. Wasn't it like 6 years ago? Isn't there a statute of limitations? How can he bring this 6 years after the fact?
11/04/2011 10:21:53 PM · #15
this country is hopeless
11/04/2011 10:26:00 PM · #16
Yes, Virginia, there ARE idiots.
11/04/2011 10:26:19 PM · #17
My theory is that he is engaged. He will find all of those from the first wedding, recreate it, except use his fiance as a substitute. Viola! Free wedding pictures. :P

11/04/2011 10:26:26 PM · #18
Originally posted by tnun:

Yes, Virginia, there ARE idiots.

hahahahahaha
11/04/2011 10:27:04 PM · #19
Originally posted by karmat:

My theory is that he is engaged. He will find all of those from the first wedding, recreate it, except use his fiance as a substitute. Viola! Free wedding pictures. :P

if he is engaged i really pity that girl.
11/04/2011 10:54:20 PM · #20
Originally posted by vawendy:

I skimmed it earlier today. Wasn't it like 6 years ago? Isn't there a statute of limitations? How can he bring this 6 years after the fact?
Yeah he got in just under that.

Crappy for the photg for sure..... Someone is clearly unstable, and it ain't the photg.
11/04/2011 10:59:44 PM · #21
Originally posted by o2bskating:

Originally posted by karmat:

My theory is that he is engaged. He will find all of those from the first wedding, recreate it, except use his fiance as a substitute. Viola! Free wedding pictures. :P

if he is engaged i really pity that girl.


I pity the photographer he hires this time!
11/04/2011 11:08:17 PM · #22
Preposterous. Isn't there a statute of limitations on this sort of thing?
11/04/2011 11:25:26 PM · #23
Originally posted by tanguera:

Preposterous. Isn't there a statute of limitations on this sort of thing?


"The couple separated around 2008 and their divorce, which Mr. Remis contends was amicable, was finalized in 2010. Mr. Remis sued in 2009, just before the statute of limitation was about to expire, according to Mr. Fried. "
11/05/2011 12:31:33 PM · #24
Regardless, he's no longer with the wife! Why would the courts even allow this?

The other part of the story is that he claims the images were of poor quality. So he waits 6 years before suing???? What was the judge thinking??? Although kudos for quoting "Memories" in her opinion.
01/12/2012 02:24:18 AM · #25
Here is an update.

//news.yahoo.com/divorced-nyc-man-suing-over-wedding-pics-speaks-133438505.html
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 06:16:29 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 06:16:29 AM EDT.