5 ms·
There's a lot to unpack here. Guy enters the news for being the good guy donating a baseball to a museum instead of collecting a big check for it. Later, on his
by MrLeap 4y ago
There's a lot to unpack here. Guy enters the news for being the good guy donating a baseball to a museum instead of collecting a big check for it. Later, on his way to a baseball game while discussing things with a "fellow attorney" he falls through a hole in a public bridge?
Is there an award for greatest plaintiff advantage? I can imagine him on stage next to a school bus full of paralegal orphans. Glad the dude is okay.
- geonic 4y agoHe also lost his 21 month old son in 2018. Poor guy.
- yabones 4y agoAnd he didn't just fall through the bridge, he dusted himself off and went to the game anyways! Guy didn't even go to the hospital for days despite being obviously concussed...
- klyrs 4y agoFunny thing about brain injuries... we don't always make the best decisions in their aftermath.
- londons_explore 4y ago
- ThePowerOfFuet 4y agoWhat a shitty thing for you to say.
- s5fs 4y agoI have to disagree as you have no evidence to support your position. Based on the information provided, it seems highly unlikely to me that a guy who passed up an easy payday for a baseball would get an attorney friend to lie for what is likely going to be a very small claim. He still attended the game, and another game a couple days later, which likely rules out substantial suffering. So, given the low potential payout what would be his motivation? Simplest explanation is the guy just fell through an ill-maintained bridge. Could happen to anyone, really!
- mbg721 4y agoAfter the record-breaking Mark McGwire home runs years ago, the IRS went after the people who ended up with the balls, arguing that even if they didn't sell them, the balls represented reportable income. Just another thing to think about.
- justin66 4y agoGiven that the guy who caught the Albert Pujols ball donated it to a 501c3, there's really not much to think about.
- renewiltord 4y agoHe gets to deduct the whole value, though, right?
- thaumasiotes 4y agoYes, his income increases by whatever the value of the ball is when he takes ownership of the ball and he deducts the same amount when he donates it to a 501c3. How else could that possibly work? Obviously, the deduction cannot reach any of his other income, because it is, by definition, consumed by the value of the ball.
- justin66 4y agoUnder a truly strict reading of the law, there might be some problems since the guy might not itemize deductions, in which case there's a pretty modest limit to the total value of charitable deductions he can make, which he might not have declared anyhow. Which might or might not be a problem depending on the dollar value of the ball he received and immediately gave away, if the whole thing came to the attention of the IRS. They theoretically might potentially want him to refile and itemize his deductions if they had an opinion about the value of the ball, and that refiling could affect his refund for that year by a small amount. This all falls pretty firmly in the "who gives a shit?" area of tax law.
- renewiltord 4y ago