Richard Dreyfuss sues father, uncle over loan

The Associated Press ^ | August 9, 2008 | The Associated Press

[Publius804]

Richard Dreyfuss sues father, uncle over loan

1 day ago

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Richard Dreyfuss is suing his father and uncle over an $870,000 loan he claims was never repaid. The lawsuit centers around a loan Dreyfuss claims he made to his relatives in 1984, who owned an interest in a downtown Los Angeles office building.

Roughly 24 years later, Dreyfuss says that loan — and interest — remains unpaid.

[SampleMan]

Um, anyone hear of Statute of Limitations?

I haven't ever heard of a time of limit for money owed. I'm not saying that there isn't one, but if there is, I've never heard of it.

I've dealt with title claims on property, which were quite old (30 years) and weren't challenged due to passage of time.

[Judith Anne]

I like that solution. How did that actually work? In whose name was the money deposited? I’d love to do things that way....not that I’m the “rick relative” just that I do get asked for momey.

[gorush]

"I think Richard Dreyfuss is a great actor. He should leave money lending and politics to those who know about something other than acting."

Roger that! I saw an interview with this guy years ago. When he's not reading a script he is as dumb as a box of rocks.

[Oatka]

In whose name was the money deposited?

In the rich guy's name - he just put it up as security, with the bank acting as the collector of payments from the relative. There was always the case that the borrower would default and the deposit would be lost, but the fact that the borrower would be dunned by the bank and not the relative evidently weeded out the deadbeats.

[Oatka]

In whose name was the money deposited?

Oops - should be:
In the rich guy's name - he just put it up as security, with the bank acting as the collector of payments from the relative. There was always the case that the borrower would default and the deposit would be lost, but the fact that the borrower would be dunned by the bank and not the RICH GUY evidently weeded out the deadbeats.

[Artemis Webb]

Dreyfuss starred in three of my all time favorite movies (Jaws, Close Encounters of the Third Kind and Stand By Me). For this reason I will forgive the fact that he's a total azzhole and an ultra left wing commie jerk.

[Pontiac]

You have it backwards. Contracts have statutes of limitations. Crimes do not.

I looked it up, both do.

Crimes statute of limitations "periods of prescription" begin with the cause of action or offence.

Contracts "periods of prescription" begin at the time that the contract becomes executable. In California the statute of limitations for Breach of a written contract is Four years.

If Richard Dreyfus took legal action to execute the contract with in the four years then the statute of limitations would not be enforced.

[Pontiac]

I've dealt with title claims on property, which were quite old (30 years) and weren't challenged due to passage of time.

It is up to the one being sued to challenge the suit on the grounds of the Statute of Limitations. With lawyers it frequently is true you get what you pay for.

[Judith Anne]

Okay, understood. A fully secured loan should get a very favorable interest rate, too, so that’s nice for the borrower.

I like that idea.

[caseinpoint]

Tax consequences are certainly one aspect I had failed to consider. Another aspect is that any executor of an estate will not repay an unenforceable loan since it deprives the heirs of their expected inheritance. If he or she does so because “it is the right thing to do”, any heir can sue the executor. I’ve seen these situations arise. I suspect either (1) preserving the loan against the statute of limitations, (2) establishing a valid claim should the building go into foreclosure or be sold, or (3) the tax issue, proving it was a loan as opposed to a gift. On the other hand, he could just be a bankrupt jerk. ;o)