Home > Blog > Judge orders parents to pay $45K for tossing son's porn, sex toy collection

Judge orders parents to pay $45K for tossing son's porn, sex toy collection

He had a real boner to pick with his parents.

A Michigan couple will have to fork over $45,000 in a smut-fueled family feud sparked when they tossed their son's pornography collection in the trash.

A federal judge ordered Beth and Paul Werking to pay $30,441 for their 43-year-old son David's discarded "trove of pornography" and sex toys, a report said.

They'll also have to pay their sleaze-enthusiast son's attorney $14,519, according to milive.com.

The value of the porn collection was estimated by expert Dr. Victoria Hartmann, according to the publication. A reported dozen boxes of items included films, magazines and sex toys, but Hartmann couldn't value 107 items on the son's list of items, the outlet stated.

"However, given the wide range of valuations for individual pieces and the inability of Dr. Hartmann to even estimate the value of these pieces, the Court declines to use an average value to award damages for these titles," US District Judge Paul Maloney wrote in his decision, according to milive.com.

David Werking had moved in with his folks in Grand Haven for a few months after his 2016 divorce, but when his parents sent some of his belongings to his new home in Indiana his favorite X-rated possessions never arrived.

"Frankly, David, I did you a big favor getting rid of all this stuff," his father said in an email after he inquired about the collection's fate.

David valued the lost items at $25,000, but wanted more because of the destruction of the property - much of which was considered irreplaceable, milive.com said, citing David's attorney.

Some of the more explicit items were stored by the Werking parents in a safe-deposit box because they thought it might be illegal, court papers said.

David won his lawsuit last year, but the judge held off on a ruling until damages could be determined, according to reports.

"In this case, there is no question that the destroyed property was David's property," Maloney wrote in a December ruling. "Defendants repeatedly admitted that they destroyed the property, and they do not dispute that they destroyed the property.

With Post wires.