Lot of ASS-umptions, including mine, here but i seriously doubt that Joe's wife is trying to make some move to keep all the cues. Starting to look like Joe kept bad(if any) records and the family is stuck in a bad spot. Unless the true owners have pics/etc to identify their cue(s) they may end up on the short end here. Bad deal all around.
Dealings with Joe Salazar Connoisseur of Cues
- Thread starter Poolhalljunkie
- Start date
Many an estate did not have records which would have cleared up financial situations. Siblings often face the same struggles with their parents estate. Who gets what and mom and dad intended me to get the “China.” Ok now what? Joe was a good guy but he didn’t hand out receipts/documentation etc on his consignments. If Joe wasn’t sophisticated enough to cover the potential issues that could arise, why would anyone think his wife would have the answers? Some of the cuemakers keep records on who owns their goods. This may end up taking years to resolve if it ever does. Very sad.
Doesn't matter how difficult...estate has the legal and moral obligation to try and do it's best to return other people's property.
If a cue's 'owner' has no proof aka receipt/pics/contract/etc just how is the estate supposed to return it? Just saying "yeah, that's my Ginacue" ain't gonna work. Knowing how JS stored his cues they are looking at multiple cases full of cues that may have zero provenance. It sounds like Joe kept a lot of this in his head. If he had it all written down this wouldn't be the problem its turned into.
This whole situation look like a BIG.
If a claimant has absolutely no documentation proving his ownership, then he will lose his claim...simple. Others, who do have actual documentation, photos, emails, texts, mail receipts, etc, will be able to match that proof with the (hopefully) still retained cues that the estate should still have and retrieve their property. The only thing needed is the cooperation of the people in charge of the Estate, which seems to be lacking. Legal counsel is badly needed here...required.
Unfortunately Joes wife is ABSOLUTELY trying to keep all the cues.
She is asking the court to throw out the lawsuit because Texas Law doesn’t enforce any contract the deceased spouse had against the living spouse.
Kind of a loophole and she will be able to keep everything Joe had from other people.
It was right in the court document Eddie posted. I didn’t take a screenshot because I thought when I quoted it and linked it it would always stay there but it’s gone right now.
Texas law does not make Joe Salazars wife honor any contract Joe had with anyone.
All the shit is hers and she’s keeping it.
One question I haven't noticed being mentioned is How much did Mr. Salazar's widow know about his business?
If he kept his business life and his personal life fairly well compartmentalized, his widow may well have not actually known that he sold cues on consignment rather than just buying and selling cues. If she didn't hear anything about consignment until after her husband's death, she could understandably be worried about being hustled by various pool players. Collectively, we pool players don't have the greatest reputation for honesty and ethics.
If he kept his business life and his personal life fairly well compartmentalized, his widow may well have not actually known that he sold cues on consignment rather than just buying and selling cues. If she didn't hear anything about consignment until after her husband's death, she could understandably be worried about being hustled by various pool players. Collectively, we pool players don't have the greatest reputation for honesty and ethics.
I do not interpret this as an attempt to get Joe's Estate to enforce any of Joe's written or verbal contracts. I believe this is a "bailment" issue whereas Joe, or his estate, has the legal obligation to return any property given to him in order to perform specific work upon the owner's demand. I don't believe that anyone is asking her to fulfill the work Joe contracted to do. If the court has not ruled on the motion with prejudice perhaps they can file in another venue, one that does not have that particular condition...Again I believe that that particular Texas law (which I have not read) applies to fulfilling contractual agreements, not returning property that does not belong to the deceased or his Estate, I believe that this is a "bailment" case.Texas law does not make Joe Salazars wife honor any contract Joe had with anyone.
All the shit is hers and she’s keeping it.
Very possible...then she still has the legal obligation as an estate administrator to verify the ownership of any and all property before she disposes of them. She may be entitled to be compensated for her efforts.
Her answer in the document was “she is not responsible for Joes obligations”
She has no obligation to do anything. She is keeping everything Joe had.
Of course...that has to be her position if she has already disposed of the property or has no intention of doing so. That doesn't make it so.
She has no obligation to do anything. She is keeping everything Joe had.
This…is why Eddie is pissed and rightly so.
It’s Texas law
She may intend on keeping everything Joe had, but as an estate administrator she does have legal obligations. I agree, it does look as though she wants it all regardless of her legal obligations. Hopefully someone, or many, will pursue this and make the courts decide.She has no obligation to do anything. She is keeping everything Joe had.
I don't believe that that law applies to this situation. Anyone can quote any law that favors them and say that it applies, doesn't make it so.
That’s what Eddie is doing and it doesn’t look good.
I looked a little and I hope I’m wrong but I think people aren’t getting their property back.