A frien of mine brought me her hubbies antlers again last year. She had some some photo touch work for me with her computer program. I told her I would mount the antlers for "them" for no charge since She had done some awesome work for me. Well....... they are going through a divorce and what a mess. She claims she "paid" for them with the work she did and since her name is on the paperwork- she should get the antlers back. She wants them for "leverage." After going through a divorce myself I really dont wont to put his trophy in her hands(even if just an antler mount). He called about the rack and I explained it to him. They are both hostile and and it would appear I am caught in the middle of a no-win situaion. All over a a broken tine 8 point rack! Any you folks been in a similar spot before?
Return to The Taxidermy Industry Category Menu
Ok, I have to say this is a bit silly on both parts. Antlers belong to the person who shot the deer. Remind her at the time she brought the Antlers in she was having them done for HIM.
But then again, you were doing them for her, free, for services rendered to you. So, for your buisness name sake, stick to your word.
But then again you could have them settle it in court and bring you the court papers for proof.
How silly people can get. I am a woman and there's no way I'd fight over an 8pt. well less it was a 26inch spread and tines of about awww say 20inches+.
Good luck with this!
I was working in a shop in Alaska and when we finished up a Dall ram and grizzly rug we called the guy who was local and told his wife on the phone. He had paid in full already. His wife came in and we loaded them in the car for her, she then drove to the local dump and set them on fire. We found that out later. They had gotten a divorce. He was mad at us. Oh well.
The customer's name that is on your contract is the person you hand them over to. You are not under any other legal obligation. If you do otherwise...WOE IS YOU! It IS the LAW. If you do anything else, you WILL be liable.
Have a Police officer there at the time you hand the rack over and be done with the matter. Keep your mouth shut and stay out of it......or you might lose what business you have due to a lawsuit.
Due as you please but you better think it through
Evidently your good book didn't teach you spelling, grammar, or punctuation!
Thank you for your response. This computer program does a pretty good job for no key board and only voice recoginition, huh?
an expert in law and religion but can't spell? The big question is is he really a "pro taxidermist?" Maybe "Pro" stands for something else? How about probationary taxidermist. LOL
Lose what business you have because of a lawsuit? Oh Really? One unhappy customer is going to keep everyone away and they'll sue over one a lousy hornmount? Let's see -- minimum lawyer fee for that would probably be at least $500.00 and the antlers are worth a $100.00? LMAO
There you are Cecil. Wondering when you would come out to play. Your display of Christian love is so obvious.
Now is that how a good little Catholic boy is taught to act? So vengful and full of yourself.
I will pray for you and hope you recover from your childhood experiences.
Cecil, I retained a lawyer a few years back to make a very similar interpretation and I was told by the barrister that it was INDEED the law.
A customer brought in a deer to be mounted. He died. His wife called me to inform me of the passing and stated that as his wife and legal heir, she would like to have the mount. Almost immediately, the deceased's brother called me demanding that I not give it to the wife as she was a cheater and a slut and that his brother had intended to divorce her had he not died.
The lawyer explained that since I had a written, legal contract in use for my shop, only the person presenting the work could be presented with the finished product. In case of death, then BY LAW, the legal heir would take precedence whether by marriage or rescinded by a legal will in place at the time of death. Now it would seem to me that if SHE presented the work to OJ and he drew up a contract, REGARDLESS of what he charged, he's bound by the same law.
Now will you believe me? George is right and supports what I have already said. Afterall, owning 10% of a LAWFIRM has got to mean something, YA THINK?
Until I am needed again, Enough of this world and back to what is "yet to come"