$550,000 Verdict Against Photographer for Harassment

Written by Eric Reagan on February 2nd, 2008 | 2 Comments


This is a great example of what not to do as a professional photographer:

John and Kerri Vickers were awarded a $550,000 verdict in their case against Ted Elden and his company Elden Associates on Nov. 28 by an Ohio Circuit Court jury. John Vickers’ mother and stepfather, Jim and Connie Murray of Wheeling, also were involved in the case.

Christopher Regan, an attorney with Bordas & Bordas in Wheeling, said Elden mailed cut-up photo negatives to the Vickers and the Murrays as well as other members of their families.

“The circumstances were like nothing you’ve ever seen before,” Regan said. “The harassment would not stop. There were 18 to 20 mailings.”

(Keep reading via West Virginia Record)



2 Responses to “$550,000 Verdict Against Photographer for Harassment”

  1. Passing Stranger

    Why am I not surprised? Elden is a conspiracy kook (mostly 911 but also other lunacy) and has given the impression of mental illness for some time.

  2. Ted Elden

    I, Ted Elden, did this job. The client WOULD NOT SIGN A CONTRACT nor give me a payment before the wedding. I did it any way, I know my work, style, images delight many – 1/2 million images so far, nationally published, international award.
    Weeks after the wedding they came to my office, signed my $ 1000 contact, and paid only $ 400. Rather than take the contracted 140 proofs, I gave them about 600 FINAL PRINTS, and later offered them any print for $ 1 (contract price was $ 8) and as per contract offered to sell the negatives.
    Over a month later, they finally paid for the wedding shoot.
    Contract was clear, if they did not want anything further then I could discard the work. Rather than discard it, I sorted thru and found the silly candid images or less then perfect images and marked them not to be used (as per the contract) and sent them to the client. They lied and deceived me as to where they were, how to reach them etc. They never elected to get even 1 print after the initial meeting. An in-law offered me $ 900 for the negatives, that I wanted to sell, but the bride had not paid me yet to shoot the wedding – so I could not let go of the negatives then.
    The mention in the article about stalking is completely false.
    The bride never said I stalked her. I have not stalked her or anyone, ever.
    The plaintiff’s neighbor was the jury foreman. I thnk there were 2 cases of perjury in those speaking of me. Another bride, to whom I gave 800+ final prints and negatives, althougth she only contracted for 140 proofs, said she had nothing (from me). That is abolutely not true. She had medium format prints and negatives.

Leave a Reply


PMA 2010

    Subscribe

  • Photography Bay on Twitter




Recent Comments:

  • Zack: So is this book no good for Olympus, Pentax, Sony, Fujifilm, Panasonic, Sigma or Samsung users?
  • Roger G: Perhaps Canon should spend more time and money testing its software rather than leaving the job to its trusting customers.
  • Peter Davies: Hi Can I upload Canon 5D Mark II Firmware Version 2.0.4 if i have Versions 1.1.0 & 1.0.7 (I have two bodies)? Or do...
  • ossme: Good, since I don’t shoot video. :p
  • Kevin T.: Thanks! We just purchased this in Feb 2010 and while dissapointed in the lack of video capabilities, the shutter speed is an...
  • Anatoly Manzhola: I just bought absolutely miraculous brand new Canon 70-200 F2.8 IS II USM. I have purchased 2 lenses to choose the best...
  • ossme: wow, Thats huge ! I wish I had that. I could use it as a storage for all my photography gear if I didn’t put the large...
  • Iris: And where is E-3 second line model? :) I want to see it!