Historic Home Run Ball Back in Girl's Hands

[blowoutcards]

Historic Home Run Ball Back in Girl's Hands

A 12 year-old girl encouraged to give up an important Ryan Howard home run ball she caught used a lawyer to help get it back.

Jennifer Valdivia wasn't expecting to latch onto a little piece of baseball history this summer.

Jennifer and her family were at the Marlins-Phillies game July 17 when Ryan Howard cracked his 200th home run. She grabbed it but after things quieted down, a Phillies representative asked for the ball, offering a plain Howard autographed ball and a short meeting with the slugger in exchange.

She didn't know it at the time, but the home run made Howard the youngest player ever to reach that milestone. It certainly has value on the collectors market and once her family realized the trade may have cost them some cash, they went to an attorney.

He filed a lawsuit, demanding the ball be returned. Did they have a case? Who knows, but it's clear that waging a court battle against a 12 year-old probably would not have played well in the media.

Feed from:
Historic Home Run Ball Back in Girl's Hands | Sports Collecting News, Memorabili#@-#@Sports Collectors Daily

Here's the full article:
Miami girl gets back historic baseball after lawsuit - Breaking News - MiamiHerald.com

[iluvfish2]

While cute, they offered the trade there, I would of asked for more back in return (like Howards bat in exchange for the ball). Once the deals done it should be over...not well now that we think about it, we want the ball back.

[MrSnyder]

Another slime ball attorney...when does, "so sad, too bad" come into play?

[bjtheman1]

Typical, so many people sue if they don't get everything they want.

[mwheeler27]

Originally Posted by iluvfish2

Once the deals done it should be over...not well now that we think about it, we want the ball back.

Unless one party to the deal is a 12-year old.

If that ball is worth more than what was traded for it, and the team knew it, they should have offered more. That's how I see it anyway. They knew they were lucky that a die-hard, "knowledgeable" fan didn't snag that ball or it would have cost them a lot more.

[hockeyguyrich]

there will be an out of court settlement

[BAMBAM]

Originally Posted by mwheeler27

Unless one party to the deal is a 12-year old.

If that ball is worth more than what was traded for it, and the team knew it, they should have offered more. That's how I see it anyway. They knew they were lucky that a die-hard, "knowledgeable" fan didn't snag that ball or it would have cost them a lot more.

That crazy Wheels. Its not like they traded with them to sell it on fleabay. The organization sent someone to make the trade for Howard to get the ball for his own trophey case most likely. If the team were to "sell" it, I'm sure it would be at the annual ALS benefit auction with all proceeds going to help fight ALS. They do the same thing when a player loses grip on his game bat and it flies into the stands. The trade the fan another bat to get the gamer back for the player.

Total scumbag move by the family (probably encouraged by some lawyer) just looking for a payday. They screwed up by obviously not knowing the significance of the HR, oh well get it over it.

[coltsfan23]

Seriously? They are suing over that? The lawyer will make a good amount of $, at least.

It's not like the girl was forced to give it up or anything; she did have a choice. There's something really wrong if the family does actually get some compensation.

[mwheeler27]

Is that ball worth more than what the team gave up for it? Is it worth a lot more? I honestly don't know, but if so, and an average baseball fan would know it, then they should have offered more.

Again this is just my opinion. It's not something I would have ever done if I was that family, but I would have known not to make that small of a trade for it. Personally, I might have asked if I could personally hand it to him, shake his hand and congratulate him while getting nothing in return but perhaps a picture.

We don't know all the facts. The family should have contacted the team first and asked for something more. Did they do this or did they go straight to the attorney? Perhaps the organization is playing hard ball with them so to speak. We just don't know.

[mwheeler27]

Originally Posted by coltsfan23

It's not like the girl was forced to give it up or anything; she did have a choice.

Sure she did, but what's she going to say? No? She's only 12 years old.

If the organization made a deal with a 12 year old, something will probably come out of this. If they made the deal with her parents, who knows what will happen?

[coltsfan23]

Originally Posted by mwheeler27

Sure she did, but what's she going to say? No? She's only 12 years old.

She easily could have said that. Twelve years old really isn't that young. Even if you disagree with that, she did have parents to help her, right? Surely they are old enough...

[BAMBAM]

It says they gave them a short meeting with Howard as part of the deal. I don't think the team was thinking resale value when making the trade. I would assume they were just trying to get something that means a lot to Howard back into his hands.

[mwheeler27]

Originally Posted by coltsfan23

She easily could have said that. Twelve years old really isn't that young. Even if you disagree with that, she did have parents to help her, right? Surely they are old enough...

12 years old is a lot younger than you think.

[mwheeler27]

Originally Posted by BAMBAM

It says they gave them a short meeting with Howard as part of the deal. I don't think the team was thinking resale value when making the trade. I would assume they were just trying to get something that means a lot to Howard back into his hands.

I agree with this and is how I would assume it went.

[coltsfan23]

Originally Posted by mwheeler27

12 years old is a lot younger than you think.

Quite possibly, though she did have parents to help...

As to the resale part of the post, I highly doubt the Phillies are after the ball for that reason. It's probably just for Howard's display/keepsake for him.

[BAMBAM]

When 13 year olds are getting knocked up these days, I don't think so Wheels. Sadly, its not like it used to be.

[mwheeler27]

Originally Posted by coltsfan23

As to the resale part of the post, I highly doubt the Phillies are after the ball for that reason. It's probably just for Howard's display/keepsake for him.

I agree completely, but can't that be said for every single historically hit home run ball? The guy or team that hits it will want to display it, but in some or most cases, they have to pay, (sometimes handsomely), in order to do that.

[mwheeler27]

Originally Posted by BAMBAM

When 13 year olds are getting knocked up these days, I don't think so Wheels. Sadly, its not like it used to be.

I won't say this very often Bammers, but I believe you're wrong here. Because 12 and 13 year olds can't make good decisions is why they are getting knocked up at an alarming rate these days.

[coltsfan23]

Originally Posted by mwheeler27

I agree completely, but can't that be said for every single historically hit home run ball? The guy or team that hits it will want to display it, but in some or most cases, they have to pay, (sometimes handsomely), in order to do that.

Oh yeah, definitely. I guess it all comes down to what really happened, but when it comes to negotiation, I tend to think that one shouldn't go back on the deal once already agreed upon. It's natural for both sides to try to start off getting a better deal than not, even though I don't think the Phillies were really looking to take advantage of her by any means. Even if they did, she and her family were not forced to do anything.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on the overall thought, but I really hope the family doesn't get anything in return as they really shouldn't.

[BAMBAM]

Originally Posted by mwheeler27

I won't say this very often Bammers, but I believe you're wrong here. Because 12 and 13 year olds can't make good decisions is why they are getting knocked up at an alarming rate these days.

Thats 100% true Wheels. Immature yes but 12 year olds today are not the innocent, naive kids from the old days in pigtails and sun dresses.

[mwheeler27]

Originally Posted by BAMBAM

When 13 year olds are getting knocked up these days, I don't think so Wheels. Sadly, its not like it used to be.

I want to comment on this one more time:

My wife worked in a maternity home for several years. She worked her way up to running the place. She had several 13 year old moms in this home that she was in charge of helping out.

In almost every case, these girls were pressured in to the situation that got them pregnant. They were not of an age to be able to make good decisions. Sort of like a baseball entity making a deal with a 12-year old.

I agree with everyone that her parents were there and could have/might have helped her. However, I know as a parent, when I'm teaching my now 13-year old son, I like to let him make decisions on his own as much as I can so he can learn from them.

We all know you cannot, as an adult, make a deal with a minor without that minor being able to back out of the deal "at any time", even after the deal is done and over. It's the law in every state. It's a "voidable" contract by the minor.

[coltsfan23]

Originally Posted by mwheeler27

We all know you cannot, as an adult, make a deal with a minor without that minor being able to back out of the deal "at any time", even after the deal is done and over. It's the law in every state. It's a "voidable" contract by the minor.

Oh, really? I was actually not aware of this. I am 18, so I'm technically an adult, but that's an interesting rule. That might describe why some people have rules saying that they won't deal with anyone under 18 (also probably because of trust, lack of maturity, etc.).

[mwheeler27]

Originally Posted by BAMBAM

Thats 100% true Wheels. Immature yes but 12 year olds today are not the innocent, naive kids from the old days in pigtails and sun dresses.

You're right. Their innocence is being taken from them without them knowing better.

[mwheeler27]

Originally Posted by coltsfan23

Oh, really? I was actually not aware of this. I am 18, so I'm technically an adult, but that's an interesting rule. That might describe why some people have rules saying that they won't deal with anyone under 18 (also probably because of trust, lack of maturity, etc.).

That's exactly right. If you were 12, and I sold you a baseball card and sent it to you, you could demand your money back without ever having to send me the card back.

There have been countless cases where minors join mail order book clubs, stamp clubs, CD/DVD clubs, etc. where they get behind on their payments, and once their parents get involved, the company has to back away because it was a minor that signed the agreement in the first place. The company cannot collect from the minor if it was in fact the minor that they entered into the agreement with.