All the defense has to point out is that ipods and any other handheld electronics are not allowed in school. Almost all schools have this in their rulebook. The exception to this rule is cell-phones but they must be turned off during school hours.

She might have had a case if she had paid her friend to watch the I IPod. Here in Michigan plenty of Parking lots in Detroit and Detroit area try this, have it printed on thier ticket/receipt, "Not responsible for lost or stolen items in vehicle. Not responsible for stolen vehicle." Michigan Law does not allow these clauses, especially when paying for a service. The service can be, hiring a storage area, vehicle parking lot, temporary storage locker such as those in airports, anything that requires pay or bailment. So I don't think friend has a case against friend for her loss, sorry I agree with some of the other writers here. "IT IS THE RESPONSIBILTY OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY TO ENSURE THAT SHE IS ABLE TO CONTROL HER OWN PROPERTY AND NOBODY ELSES! UNLESS THERE IS A BAILMENT INVOVLED. NO BAILMENT NO PROBLEM." We have as far as law goes, have tryed to make everyone else the bad person, the responsibile person, except the responsible party. But then lawyers love this because it means more business for them.

This is another sad example of how "lawsuit-crazy" the American public is at this point. Whether we're all just petty people or we're driven by lawyers who want to drag us into the courtroom to solve our problems instead of actually talking to one another or whether it's both or neither, this is another sad example of a silly "people's court" style dispute where a new iPod would have smoothed the whole thing over. Sheesh. Tell them what-if either of them are reading this? Email me, I'll freaking hook you guys up, just for the sake of our poor legal system. :(

I just want to set the story straight. My daughter, Shannon Derrick lent her two week old Ipod to Stephanie. Stephanie returned it a while later, since Shannon wasn't at her desk Stephanie laid it on her books. Shannon believes that when you borrow something from a friend, you take care of it and return it to the person. Stephanie's family feels it's tough luck for Shannon, that is why I took it to small claims court. If you still think Shannon is to blame, let me borrow a $300.00 item from you and leave it on your front porch when you're not home. When someone takes it, you'll just think oh well I learned a lesson. Or will you?

Oh yes a couple of other items. It was the last day of school so kids were walking the halls, taking pictures, listening to music.That is the only reason Shannon brought her Ipod to school that day.About tying up the court system, I thought that was why our country has small claims court. When one person feels they are a victim and the other person says "too bad" what other recourse does a person have? I paid to file in small claims, Stephanie's family has hired a lawyer and requested this go to trial. I told them if they would have replaced the Ipod or offered to pay half 3 months ago, they would have spent a lot less than what they're spending on expensive attorneys. Thanks for your time.

The argument, assuming it's completely true and not being filtered through a daughter who doesn't want to tell her mother the whole story because she's afraid she'll get in trouble, is completely valid and sure, it falls under the kind of litigation that small claims court is for. Still. This is a perfect example of something that two civilized adults can and should be able to sit down together and hash out like grown ups, not children running to the court as the deciding authority. I'm sure that if someone did the same thing to me, and left a 300 dollar item on my porch (like UPS or FedEx does with my Amazon orders, but I generally don't sue them for it) then I should feel comfortable approaching them, explaining that I don't feel that's the right way to treat loaned property, and now that its gone, we should discuss recompense. I'm not disputing that there's validity to the claim, I am disputing the "got a disagreement? JUST SUE!" mindset that seems apparent here. If the other party essentially said "too bad, so sad," and the parents of that child said so as well, then there's a reason to go to court. But in general I tend to feel that involving the legal system is a last resort when behaving like responsible, civilized adults falls through. To be honest, my parents, had I been in the same situation, would have tried to discuss the issue with the friends' parents and get them to pay for the damages, at least in part, and then would have kept the money and had me work to earn the cash to buy myself a new iPod, either through allowance or odds and ends tasks around the house-that kind of thing teaches responsibility and learning the value of money and the value of your possessions, and to think twice before loaning out valuable things to other people, not the kind of self-entitlement that the court system reinforces. If I were the child who improperly returned the iPod, my parents probably would have wound up paying for my mistake like responsible adults, and I would have been subsequently punished or made to work to pay my debt. And trust me, I'm in my 20s, so I'm not speaking as some old-schooler complaining about whipper-snappers and their lack of responsibility. I just think that there's a lesson here, and it's being drowned in favor of self-entitlement. There's a teachable moment for the children AND the parents involved here, and I think it's being lost. Just my humble opinion.

I completely agree with the comments, if for some stupid reason you actually do win this lawsuit, you should make Shannon work to earn the money for the replacement Ipod. This would make her learn to be responsible for her belongings. By just giving her the money or buying a new Ipod gives her the mindset "Oh well if I lend it out again I can always sue them, tee hee." I dont think as a parent you are setting a good example for your daughter. We have enough sue happy people in this world already, we dont need anymore.

I'd like to see the other side of the story before making any assumptions or opinions in this matter.

Shannon saved for six months to buy her Ipod. I am a single working mom and she babysits and saves to buy all extras that many teen-agers take for granted. I completely disagree with the people that say it is wrong to take this to court. This is why our country has small claims. So that people settle differences a legal, rational way when the other party won't even acknowledge they were wrong. And just because there are plenty of "sue happy" people in this world, doesn't mean that there aren't going to be valid reasons to use our court systems. When this first happened, Shannon said if it was reversed we wouldn't even discuss it.She would have apologized and made payments to the other person.I am not embarrassed that I am teaching my daughter to stick up for her rights the legal, sensible way instead of cowering away when the other party says "too bad".

According to Stephanie's father's comment, you just sued out of the blue, and there was no "too bad" involved. Seriously, there was a time when we could settle our differences like civilized adults. Now we resort to hiding behind lawyers and throwing mud at one another. It's no wonder our children turn out the way they do these days.