The Blind Side 2: The search for more money

[Frank Drebin 5663]

23 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

After reading some of the details, I suspect this is close to the truth.  He's a "son" in name only, the gets split the estate in half and not thirds.  He eventually figured this out and felt burned.

Whether he is adopted and a legal heir is immaterial if he is named in the will.  According to the book, they added him to the will. My recollection is that Sean said in the book that Michael was going to be rich one day due to the will regardless if he ever went pro and thus did not need to take any money from colleges under the table.  If he lied about that, it is really shitty.

I doubt they showed anyone the terms of the will, including Oher or the Tuohy kids.

Given their wealth, I suspect they also have a family LP.  To the extent he has LP units, that is probably a pretty decent indication what -- if any -- provision they are intending to make to him in their will.

 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13510]

I would caution anyone in using the movie in understand the facts in this situation. Movies made about real events or people are rarely 100% accurate. Situations, dialogue and even people can be changed. 

Take the movie Moneyball, also sourced from a Michael Lewis book, there are tons of inaccuracies in it just to make the story better. Of the top of my head, I recall they made a point in the movie of signing Giambi Jr, and Bradford. Those guys were already on the team and didn't require Jonah Hill's character demonstrating Bradford's worth.

[txhorns 2409]

2 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

Wasn’t Brittany Spears fighting to get released from her dad’s conservatorship recently?

You’re right on that but the point still stands, until then the majority of the country didn’t know what a conservatorship was.  That was also a very recent legal battle.

[Gene Parmesan 4005]

8 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

While family isn't only a legal term, it certainly has legal significance. If he is a family and a formally adopted, then he becomes an heir under intestacy laws and potentially even under a will if it isn't very specific (e.g., says split equally among "children").  Further, being family and adopted would have made it easier to claim Michael as a dependent for tax purposes.

I think the fact Mr. Tuohy has come out and said that adoption of an adult wasn't legal and that's why they went this route is suspect. It clearly is legal and would have done what they needed in terms of NCAA booster issues. While it wouldn't have granted the Tuohy's any other rights or responsibilities for Michael as an adult, as their legal child they certainly were free to take care of him just as any other parent would.

That said, I don't think the lawsuit goes anywhere. 

I get it.  They either didn't want to adopt him and give him rights to their estate, or getting the conservatorship was the easiest option to get him eligible for Ole Miss.  Had he not developed into a good enough player for Ole Miss and took a scholarship elsewhere his relationship would be nothing more than friends.  Had he went to Alabama then NFL you have the same story with no need for adoption/conservatorship.  Until we get the screwed over facts I don't think either of those two scenarios are nefarious other than they steered him to their alma mater.

[wild_turkey 3159]

I really don't understand what it matters adoption vs conservatorship?  I get that they have different legal definitions and duties, but otherwise it boils down that they did take care of him, and of course it was because he was good at football.  Now if they screwed him out of money, I hope they get exposed, and he gets paid, but I don't really give a crap if the family let everyone think they adopted him when they only had a conservatorship. 

Tend to agree. It doesn’t seem like they hid the conservatorship, and that it was more of a legal distinction, but they otherwise treated him like a full family member and adopted son.

Furthermore, it seems Michael knew about it, at least by the time of his 2011 book, in which he says the conservatorship wasn’t important because they were family. If the distinction wasn’t important to him, isn’t that what really matters?

[ztejas 43418]

38 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

Whether he is adopted and a legal heir is immaterial if he is named in the will.  According to the book, they added him to the will. My recollection is that Sean said in the book that Michael was going to be rich one day due to the will regardless if he ever went pro and thus did not need to take any money from colleges under the table.  If he lied about that, it is really shitty.

I doubt they showed anyone the terms of the will, including Oher or the Tuohy kids.

Given their wealth, I suspect they also have a family LP.  To the extent he has LP units, that is probably a pretty decent indication what -- if any -- provision they are intending to make to him in their will.

 

Well he's probably out of the will now. 

[Frank Drebin 5663]

Just now, ztejas said:

Well he's probably out of the will now. 

Maybe.

If they really consider him a son, maybe not.  It would take a lot for me to disinherit my kids.  Maybe they feel he is being led astray and don't place blame on him.  Maybe they feel they have some culpability and don't place all the blame on him.

['stache 21802]

2 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

Are the rights an adopted parent of an 18-year old any different from the rights a natural parent of an 18-year old? As far as I know, they are not. So, I'm just not clear why the Tuohy's needed something more for Michael than they would have needed for their own children (or that any other parent in the US needs for their own children). 

This is the question I still have. An 18 year old has autonomy either way. A parent, biological or adopted, can't overrule an 18 year old's decision making, including medical decisions. The only scenario I can think of is medical decisions of a 19 year old who is unconscious. If it turns out that all the "conservatorship" was for was to show the NCAA a basis for feeding and housing him and allowing him to go to Ole Miss, it should be easy to prove. It would still be a problem for me since, again, the public persona was adoption, etc., as someone proved above that the lady still says "adoption" on her attention horse website. Oher's earlier description also was that he was told conservatorship and adoption were the same thing. Again, if the sole purpose was to let him to go Ole Miss, and it's proven, then okay, but if they used that power for anything else, even getting a few bucks here and there off of Oher's name, it's a problem, if not legally, than publicly. 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13510]

I see Oher as coming out of this as looking worse than he started. Did the Tuoheys cross every T or dot every I? Probably not but it seems unlikely to me that they did anything against him or cheated him out of any money. But it's possible they cheated him.

It's easy for someone on the outside to hear that they were to receive a percentage of the movie and that it earned $300m, so they must have taken home $10+m.  When in reality they probably earned relatively little from the movie but indirectly it's probably done well for them.

Instead Oher decided to extort them for whatever reason and now he's going to drag them through the mud. None of them will ever fully wash the mud now.

Finally Oher may have gotten himself taken out of any will if he was there to begin with. Who knows. Fighting for pennies now when the real prize is down the road. 

 

[gatormarc 911]

7 hours ago, ztejas said:

Oh - I know. But the disdain was pretty universal with no one playing devil's advocate or coming to her defense. 

Well, there was one person that sort of defended her as not a particularly special asshole, just the standard level of piece of shit.

[Dahobbs 17534]

10 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

It's easy for someone on the outside to hear that they were to receive a percentage of the movie and that it earned $300m, so they must have taken home $10+m.  When in reality they probably earned relatively little from the movie but indirectly it's probably done well for them.

People keep quoting box office figures for the movie as if that is the only way movies make money. I'm sure DVD/streaming rights for the Blind Side have also generated significant revenue. 

Quote

Instead Oher decided to extort them for whatever reason and now he's going to drag them through the mud. None of them will ever fully wash the mud now.

This actually may be a problem for him if the Tuohy's version of events is correct. Their version made it sound a lot like extortion and not like normal settlement efforts. See Michael Avenatti and Nike. 

 

Edited August 16, 2023 by Dahobbs

[Dahobbs 17534]

On 8/14/2023 at 3:46 PM, 'stache said:

 

Wait, this ugly bitch was the one portrayed by Sandra Bullock, apparently as a total milf? Yeah, totally believable, lol. If I'm ever portrayed on film, I guess it should be Ryan Gossling, just give him black hair and darker skin, lol.

Eh, other pictures aren't so bad.... doesn't seem like terribly inaccurate casting to me. 

 

 

 

[runthebone 7968]

I'm not following this very closely, but I wouldn't rely on a defense of "they're rich, so they wouldn't screw someone out of a few thousand dollars."

[redswingline 1057]

17 hours ago, Valmy77 said:

That part at the end about how other poor black kids in Mississippi get killed because they didn't get saved by Ole Miss boosters was especially ridiculous.

The mindset goes back to at least the reconstruction period. Systemic, baked in oppression in the former confederate states.

You should check out some of the old textbooks used by public schools in Alabama from the 1920s-1970s. Tons of confederate propaganda.

This is a good article on an old public school book, "Know Alabama". It can certainly be assumed the same bs was taught in Mississippi.

 

https://birminghamwatch.org/know-alabama-justified-slavery-praised-confederacy-schoolchildren/

[NeverMarryAStripper 21898]

Fuck it. NVM.

Edited August 16, 2023 by NeverMarryAStripper

[TwiceHorn 31450]

3 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

Are the rights an adopted parent of an 18-year old any different from the rights a natural parent of an 18-year old? As far as I know, they are not. So, I'm just not clear why the Tuohy's needed something more for Michael than they would have needed for their own children (or that any other parent in the US needs for their own children). 

Well, say the school needed parental authorization for a vaccine, or a field trip, or consent to play football or something like those various things that come up during a school career.  They tend to want or need a legal parent or guardian to sign off on those things.  That's for a minor child, though, of course.

Of course, most of us turned 18 at some point in our senior year, and at that point, the school wouldn't need anything from parents I guess.  But I don't recall the need for any of those things going away just because most had attained majority by spring of the senior year.

And, a parent is entitled to put an adult but dependent child on health insurance, to age 26 now.  And the Tuohy's conservatorship order specifically mentioned ability to make health care decisions, which wouldn't ordinarily be something the parents, natural or otherwise, of an adult child would have, except practically.

But, it has been specifically mentioned that they needed some kind of legal relationship with him to allow him to sign with Ole Miss due to their booster status to avoid an inference of non-cash benefits, I guess.

Also a curiosity about adult adoptions in TN, when referring to the inheritance angle:

1. If adopted over the age of 18, the adopted parents’ wills must clearly state the adoptee’s name to guarantee they are considered a beneficiary of the estate. Merely leaving property to your “children” or “heirs” will not ensure the inheritance rights under those instruments.⁵

[Catdaddyhorn 3444]

10 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Haha, yeah I guess the movie was kind of syrupy.  Come to think of it, I don't remember hardly a thing about the movie.

Disagree about the book.  Like most Lewis stuff, it was an expose of the business of football, mostly at the college level.  And of course I was already familiar with most of that as an insane fan.  But it was good to see it in a sort of complete context involving actual humans.

I've been a huge Lewis fan going back to Liars Poker.  I did not recall that he and Tuohy were big buds.  That seems rather at odds with what I knew or think about Lewis.  I mean, Tuohy is just your standard southern clod, and Lewis is a Princeton art history major with an MBA from LSE.

And that brings up one of the odder factoids that came up:  Lewis gave the Tuohys half of his proceeds from the movie?  What's that all about?

I believe Lewis and Tuohy are high school classmates from some high school in New Orleans. In fact, it may be the same high school that all of the Mannings went to. Not reading Liars Poker before I finished college is a life long regret of mine. I remember reading an interview with Lewis where he related how he wrote it as some sort of exhortatory tome on the ills of Wall Street, but after reading letters from fans of the book he realized it had the exact opposite effect on everyone who read it. 

[ztejas 43418]

4 minutes ago, Catdaddyhorn said:

I remember reading an interview with Lewis where he related how he wrote it as some sort of exhortatory tome on the ills of Wall Street, but after reading letters from fans of the book he realized it had the exact opposite effect on everyone who read it. 

Funny how that always happens.

Wall Street, American Psycho, Wolf of Wall Street...

[redswingline 1057]

20 hours ago, redswingline said:

-What does "an equal cut" mean, exactly? Does each person in the family (so, 5 people including Michael) get a cut? Or is it Tuhys get half and Michael gets half? That aside, why wouldn't Michael get most if not all of it? He was the main subject of this film. I don't get why they would take any of it to be honest.

 

To answer my own question - it has been reported that everyone in the family got an equal share. So the proceeds were divided by 5. Apparently those proceeds aren't all that much money. Perhaps something else led to a falling out between the family members.

 

I can't help but think that oher is pissed that better terms weren't negotiated for the book and rights for the film. The film grossed +$300 million but the way things were signed and agreed to, it appears the family made very little from it.
 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38204108/faq-sorting-blind-side-claims-oher-tuohys

 

Edited August 16, 2023 by redswingline

[TreatyOak 16313]

“No good deed goes unpunished.”

While the phrase is often attributed to Oscar Wilde, it first appeared in a book by Walter Map in the 12th Century

[Brothahorn 10087]

14 hours ago, Texzilla58 said:

The folks that will look really bad if this goes to court will be Hollywood. They will have to expose all payments made on the film, which will expose their fucked up costs accounting to show massive losses. Stan Lee didn’t get a dime from Spider-Man which grossed like a billion dollars.

 

[Deej 76759]

5 hours ago, txhorns said:

They didn’t have to do anything.

And they likely wouldn't if he didn't have the physical skills to help Ole Miss on the offensive line. 

[Texzilla58 4733]

While family isn't only a legal term, it certainly has legal significance. If he is a family and a formally adopted, then he becomes an heir under intestacy laws and potentially even under a will if it isn't very specific (e.g., says split equally among "children").  Further, being family and adopted would have made it easier to claim Michael as a dependent for tax purposes.
I think the fact Mr. Tuohy has come out and said that adoption of an adult wasn't legal and that's why they went this route is suspect. It clearly is legal and would have done what they needed in terms of NCAA booster issues. While it wouldn't have granted the Tuohy's any other rights or responsibilities for Michael as an adult, as their legal child they certainly were free to take care of him just as any other parent would.
That said, I don't think the lawsuit goes anywhere. 

I think you’re getting the timeline mixed up. Their dealing with Oher was in high school to get him into ole miss. That was long before he was a pro prospect; OT is the 2nd most scarce position in the l ague for lots of reasons. I think the issues were room and board and support for an adult still in High school from a booster.

I’m moving on from this until we get a real timeline, real facts, and the real ncaa rules of the time. My opinion is early it was driven by ncaa rules and later by the fucked accounting of Hollywood. It think Oher has been given an unrealistic view of the monies paid for the movie, and is eyeballing what isn’t there.

[Dahobbs 17534]

8 minutes ago, Texzilla58 said:

I think you’re getting the timeline mixed up. Their dealing with Oher was in high school to get him into ole miss. That was long before he was a pro prospect; OT is the 2nd most scarce position in the l ague for lots of reasons. I think the issues were room and board and support for an adult still in High school from a booster.

I’m moving on from this until we get a real timeline, real facts, and the real ncaa rules of the time. My opinion is early it was driven by ncaa rules and later by the fucked accounting of Hollywood. It think Oher has been given an unrealistic view of the monies paid for the movie, and is eyeballing what isn’t there.

I think you responded to the wrong post, as I didn't say anything about the NFL. 

[TwiceHorn 31450]

2 hours ago, Catdaddyhorn said:

I believe Lewis and Tuohy are high school classmates from some high school in New Orleans. In fact, it may be the same high school that all of the Mannings went to. Not reading Liars Poker before I finished college is a life long regret of mine. I remember reading an interview with Lewis where he related how he wrote it as some sort of exhortatory tome on the ills of Wall Street, but after reading letters from fans of the book he realized it had the exact opposite effect on everyone who read it. 

Been a while since I read any Lewis, but my sense of all of them is he is casting a subtle side eye at pretty much everything he writes about.

And yeah, a couple of people have pointed that out and yes it was Newman.

[txhorns 2409]

59 minutes ago, Deej said:

And they likely wouldn't if he didn't have the physical skills to help Ole Miss on the offensive line. 

Still doesn’t take away from the fact that they did take him in.  Are you insinuating that they should not have done that?  People do good deeds for selfish reasons every day, that doesn’t take away the good that was done.

[Deej 76759]

Just now, txhorns said:

Still doesn’t take away from the fact that they did take him in.  Are you insinuating that they should not have done that?  People do good deeds for selfish reasons every day, that doesn’t take away the good that was done.

People do, but I'm just wary of an Ole Miss booster just happening to take in a kid with the physical attributes to be a starting offensive lineman. 

If he was some Urkel-looking kid, I doubt they bother. 

[ztejas 43418]

I just want to say - the title gets better and better the longer this thread goes.

Well done @Evil Bill Obrien

[txhorns 2409]

3 minutes ago, Deej said:

People do, but I'm just wary of an Ole Miss booster just happening to take in a kid with the physical attributes to be a starting offensive lineman. 

If he was some Urkel-looking kid, I doubt they bother. 

Even if that’s the only reason they took him in it was still a huge benefit for Oher.  Do you think that he was better off with them not taking him in?

[Deej 76759]

I just think they should have kept their fucking mouths shut and not sold the movie rights. Why do you have to shout out to the world about your good deeds?

Oh, that's right, you're money grubbing attention whores who want to give your alma mater an advantage on the football field. 

[TwiceHorn 31450]

What's now coming to mind is something I'd never really considered.  I don't think Lewis needed permission to write about the Tuohys and Oher, and their granting him access implicitly waives or grants any needed permission.  And I think permission would only be needed to avoid or minimize any defamation claims.

Maybe that is why Lewis felt he should share something with the Tuohys.

A movie company would need to secure rights to adapt the book or risk copyright infringement.  But I guess getting rights to the book doesn't include the right to visually characterize living people.  Thus the need to pay off the Tuohys and Oher, or otherwise secure the rights.

[956 Worldwide 34705]

7 hours ago, Gene Parmesan said:

I don't know when they sold the restaurants but he would have to be pretty stupid if he thinks the family that helped him through high school and college was going to give him 1/3 of a nine figure estate.  You guys are taking the word family more serious than Dominic Toretto.

I don’t mind using a flexible term of “family.” I think if you go on TV and around the country and talk about adoption, and refer to a kid who you took in as you “son”— then you should have adopted him. I don’t see any conflict between a conservatorship AND adult adoption if they indeed wanted a legal, official familial relationship. 
 

This isn’t a comment on his case.  It’s about posing as something you aren’t.  And sure, I understand they don’t want to share a huge estate or inheritance with him, and didn’t from the beginning. That’s understandable. But it also means they didn’t want him as their “son” in the same way as their biological son and so telling national audiences that there’s no difference between Oher and their other kids and urging others to adopt is hypocritical at best. 
 

These rich folks wanted to steer an athletic talent who needed help to play at Ole Miss and they did, and then mom wanted to be celebrated for doing so. That’s gross, regardless of the legal standing Oher has. 

[Frank Drebin 5663]

2 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I don’t mind using a flexible term of “family.” I think if you go on TV and around the country and talk about adoption, and refer to a kid who you took in as you “son”— then you should have adopted him. I don’t see any conflict between a conservatorship AND adult adoption if they indeed wanted a legal, official familial relationship. 
 

This isn’t a comment on his case.  It’s about posing as something you aren’t.  And sure, I understand they don’t want to share a huge estate or inheritance with him, and didn’t from the beginning. That’s understandable. But it also means they didn’t want him as their “son” in the same way as their biological son and so telling national audiences that there’s no difference between Oher and their other kids and urging others to adopt is hypocritical at best. 
 

These rich folks wanted to steer an athletic talent who needed help to play at Ole Miss and they did, and then mom wanted to be celebrated for doing so. That’s gross, regardless of the legal standing Oher has. 

I thought there were sensitivities about his birth mother, who he still had a relationship with, and adoption.  Because typically to do an adoption, you have to terminate the parental rights of the birth parents.  Assuming that holds true for adult adoptions, that could be a valid reason why they did not do adoption.

Shit, no idea if his dad was still alive or if they knew who he was given Oher had 11 siblings with different dads, but there are also all sorts of due process issues with terminating parental rights -- giving notice and hearings to both birth parents.  That could have seriously delayed or even hindered doing an adoption.

[Frank Drebin 5663]

5 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I don’t mind using a flexible term of “family.” I think if you go on TV and around the country and talk about adoption, and refer to a kid who you took in as you “son”— then you should have adopted him. I don’t see any conflict between a conservatorship AND adult adoption if they indeed wanted a legal, official familial relationship. 
 

This isn’t a comment on his case.  It’s about posing as something you aren’t.  And sure, I understand they don’t want to share a huge estate or inheritance with him, and didn’t from the beginning. That’s understandable. But it also means they didn’t want him as their “son” in the same way as their biological son and so telling national audiences that there’s no difference between Oher and their other kids and urging others to adopt is hypocritical at best. 
 

These rich folks wanted to steer an athletic talent who needed help to play at Ole Miss and they did, and then mom wanted to be celebrated for doing so. That’s gross, regardless of the legal standing Oher has. 

Pretty sure in the book the Tuohys claim that added Oher to their will and that he would be rich regardless of whether he ever made it to the pros.

They could be lying about that.  But I have a clear recollection of that being in the Lewis book.

[ztejas 43418]

10 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I don’t mind using a flexible term of “family.” I think if you go on TV and around the country and talk about adoption, and refer to a kid who you took in as you “son”— then you should have adopted him. I don’t see any conflict between a conservatorship AND adult adoption if they indeed wanted a legal, official familial relationship. 
 

This isn’t a comment on his case.  It’s about posing as something you aren’t.  And sure, I understand they don’t want to share a huge estate or inheritance with him, and didn’t from the beginning. That’s understandable. But it also means they didn’t want him as their “son” in the same way as their biological son and so telling national audiences that there’s no difference between Oher and their other kids and urging others to adopt is hypocritical at best. 
 

These rich folks wanted to steer an athletic talent who needed help to play at Ole Miss and they did, and then mom wanted to be celebrated for doing so. That’s gross, regardless of the legal standing Oher has. 

This is very presumptuous. 

Edited August 17, 2023 by ztejas

[TwiceHorn 31450]

3 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

I thought there were sensitivities about his birth mother, who he still had a relationship with, and adoption.  Because typically to do an adoption, you have to terminate the parental rights of the birth parents.  Assuming that holds true for adult adoptions, that could be a valid reason why they did not do adoption.

Shit, no idea if his dad was still alive or if they knew who he was given Oher had 11 siblings with different dads, but there are also all sorts of due process issues with terminating parental rights -- giving notice and hearings to both birth parents.  That could have seriously delayed or even hindered doing an adoption.

From what I read, it doesn't require a formal termination of natural parental rights, that can be a hangup in a child adoption if the birth mother doesn't consent.

However, the legal result of an adult adoption is that parental rights are terminated.  So, yeah, that might have been a consideration.  According to the conservatorship order, his mother was present and stated consent to the proceeding.

[Frank Drebin 5663]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

From what I read, it doesn't require a formal termination of natural parental rights, that can be a hangup in a child adoption if the birth mother doesn't consent.

However, the legal result of an adult adoption is that parental rights are terminated.  So, yeah, that might have been a consideration.  According to the conservatorship order, his mother was present and stated consent to the proceeding.

I think at a minimum a conservatorship would be easier to sell to birth mom and hurt her feelings less than an adoption.  It is not a court telling mom that she is no longer mom.  That would be hard for Oher to do to his birth mom, who he still cared for.

[wild_turkey 3159]

I just think they should have kept their fucking mouths shut and not sold the movie rights. Why do you have to shout out to the world about your good deeds?
Oh, that's right, you're money grubbing attention whores who want to give your alma mater an advantage on the football field. 

I think their decision to take him in was at least partly driven by his football talent, which is a little scummy, at least from the standpoint of boosters going to great lengths to direct a high school player to their preferred school. I think that’s a fair criticism, although at least Oher got a home out of it, which is more than what many recruits get.

I’m not sure I agree with characterizing them as attention whores who were shouting their good deeds. Michael Lewis chose to write their story, which is kind of what he does, plus he was a close friend. Hollywood then took notice, and hardly anyone in their position would decline a movie that was going to portray their family in a positive light.

[Beau Vine 54211]

3 hours ago, txhorns said:

Even if that’s the only reason they took him in it was still a huge benefit for Oher.  Do you think that he was better off with them not taking him in?

His HS coach was Hugh Freeze.  You telling me that Hugh Freeze wasn't going to rescue a 6'5' 300# kid at his own school?  Hugh would have bought him a new car and gotten him laid all the time.  

[Beau Vine 54211]

29 minutes ago, wild_turkey said:

I’m not sure I agree with characterizing them as attention whores who were shouting their good deeds. Michael Lewis chose to write their story, which is kind of what he does, plus he was a close friend. Hollywood then took notice, and hardly anyone in their position would decline a movie that was going to portray their family in a positive light.

Someone also made them do this:

 

[tx 3 putt 76905]

Looooooot of D1 prospects never come close to the nfl 

[tx 3 putt 76905]

7 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, say the school needed parental authorization for a vaccine, or a field trip, or consent to play football or something like those various things that come up during a school career.  They tend to want or need a legal parent or guardian to sign off on those things.  That's for a minor child, though, of course.

Of course, most of us turned 18 at some point in our senior year, and at that point, the school wouldn't need anything from parents I guess.  But I don't recall the need for any of those things going away just because most had attained majority by spring of the senior year.

And, a parent is entitled to put an adult but dependent child on health insurance, to age 26 now.  And the Tuohy's conservatorship order specifically mentioned ability to make health care decisions, which wouldn't ordinarily be something the parents, natural or otherwise, of an adult child would have, except practically.

But, it has been specifically mentioned that they needed some kind of legal relationship with him to allow him to sign with Ole Miss due to their booster status to avoid an inference of non-cash benefits, I guess.

Also a curiosity about adult adoptions in TN, when referring to the inheritance angle:

1. If adopted over the age of 18, the adopted parents’ wills must clearly state the adoptee’s name to guarantee they are considered a beneficiary of the estate. Merely leaving property to your “children” or “heirs” will not ensure the inheritance rights under those instruments.⁵

Someone had to give parental consent for him to play football 

Edited August 17, 2023 by tx 3 putt

[Helobious 9448]

1 minute ago, tx 3 putt said:

Someone had to give parental consent for him to play football 

He was bouncing around foster families for years and had more than gotten permission to play football already. The movie makes it seem like he had never played football in his life until Sandra Bullock took him to practice and showed him how to play. In reality he had actually been named an all-state offensive lineman the prior season and was a Rivals 5-star recruit before ever moving in with the Tuohy’s. No one knows that because of the bullshit portrayed in the movie.

[956 Worldwide 34705]

7 hours ago, Helobious said:

He was bouncing around foster families for years and had more than gotten permission to play football already. The movie makes it seem like he had never played football in his life until Sandra Bullock took him to practice and showed him how to play. In reality he had actually been named an all-state offensive lineman the prior season and was a Rivals 5-star recruit before ever moving in with the Tuohy’s. No one knows that because of the bullshit portrayed in the movie.

This is true. The facts:

1. Hugh Freeze submitted his school application and got him in the private school.

2. He was a star athlete and top recruit but had an unstable living condition, bouncing around the foster system. The Tuohys took him in after he was a star recruit. 
 

3. His GPA was awful, the Tuohys paid for a tutor and also for him to enroll in BYU online courses to get it up enough to sign an LOI. 
 

4. He and Coach Freeze ended up at Ole Miss at the same time and the NCAA immediately opened an investigation. 
 

I don’t see how you look at that and come away with an impression that these weren’t boosters helping Ole Miss. That doesn’t preclude a real relationship with Oher and doing nice things. 

[JBJ 3654]

29 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

This is true. The facts:

1. Hugh Freeze submitted his school application and got him in the private school.

2. He was a star athlete and top recruit but had an unstable living condition, bouncing around the foster system. The Tuohys took him in after he was a star recruit. 
 

3. His GPA was awful, the Tuohys paid for a tutor and also for him to enroll in BYU online courses to get it up enough to sign an LOI. 
 

4. He and Coach Freeze ended up at Ole Miss at the same time and the NCAA immediately opened an investigation. 
 

I don’t see how you look at that and come away with an impression that these weren’t boosters helping Ole Miss. That doesn’t preclude a real relationship with Oher and doing nice things. 

This is all true.

I don't like the implication people are making though that this was somehow exploiting Oher, though.  Oher is an now an ex-NFL player largely because the Tuoys provided him resources he needed at a critical time in his life.  It was at the very least a mutually beneficial relationship.  And even if it were some sort of cold business-like relationship.  It's obvious who benefited more.

[Texas Wahoo 3391]

28 minutes ago, JBJ said:

This is all true.

I don't like the implication people are making though that this was somehow exploiting Oher, though.  Oher is an now an ex-NFL player largely because the Tuoys provided him resources he needed at a critical time in his life.  It was at the very least a mutually beneficial relationship.  And even if it were some sort of cold business-like relationship.  It's obvious who benefited more.

[Frank Drebin 5663]

Lewis responds

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/blind-side-author-michael-lewis-breaks-silence-michael-oher-petition-against-tuohy-family

[Texas Wahoo 3391]

 

 

[redswingline 1057]

9 hours ago, Frank Drebin said:

Lewis responds

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/blind-side-author-michael-lewis-breaks-silence-michael-oher-petition-against-tuohy-family

 

Here is my guess about this lawsuit: Oher sees the movie making +$300 million and thinks he is getting screwed over because he is getting peanuts from it. Well, that may be the case but its not by the Tuoys doing it. It was the result of the negotiations for the book / movie rights. Just because the movie made a killing vs. a low budget, doesn't mean the studio then turns around and gives everyone involved bonuses or something. You get what you signed up for.

[Jkwellborn 6697]

This is all true.
I don't like the implication people are making though that this was somehow exploiting Oher, though.  Oher is an now an ex-NFL player largely because the Tuoys provided him resources he needed at a critical time in his life.  It was at the very least a mutually beneficial relationship.  And even if it were some sort of cold business-like relationship.  It's obvious who benefited more.

If he was a 5 star left tackle, someone was going to get him in a college. He might have gotten to the NFL without them.