Judge: Castle Rock woman owns $12,000 violin but daughter gets custody
A family fight over a prized violin could make other Colorado parents think twice before loaning their children a car, a computer or other items of value for very long.
A Douglas County court said Castle Rock mother Carol Rist owns the disputed $12,000 violin but gave custody of the instrument to her adult daughter in a lawsuit that followed a personal falling-out between the two.
The reasons were twofold: The daughter, a professional musician, had used the violin ever since Rist purchased it in 1999. At one point after the fight, Rist agreed to let her daughter use the instrument if she paid for insurance, but she changed her mind after the young woman bought a policy.
Dividing ownership of an item and the right to possess it appears to be a novel concept for anything but land in Colorado, according to Rist’s attorney.
Rist said she just wants to warn other parents with adult children.
“This has been a hard lesson to learn,” said the 65-year-old homemaker. “If you’re going to lend anything to your kids, you have to make sure it’s not a gift — it’s a loan. Put it in writing.”
Monument attorney Debra DeRee took on Rist’s case after the county court decision and after an appeal to a district court failed. She’s now petitioning the state Supreme Court to take up a case she said could have broad and unintended consequences for Colorado property law.
The state’s highest court hasn’t yet said whether it will consider it.
“This ruling opens up a can of worms. Do you give your kid a car to use during high school and decide you want to sell it but can’t?” said DeRee. “Who is the beneficiary of the insurance policy? What happens upon Mom’s death? It’s absolutely bizarre.”
The Rist family home houses a few guitars, a flute, a didgeridoo, a fiddle and a piano. From very young ages, the children were encouraged to pursue musical interests, said son Lee Rist, who backs his mom in the dispute.
“We’re all music lovers,” he said. “We all play.”
Carol Rist purchased the Nikolai Tambovsky-made instrument in 1999 for $4,900 and bought five other violins over the years.
Her daughter lived with her and used the instrument — first while taking lessons and later as a professional musician in a John Denver tribute band — though Rist paid to insure it and listed the violin in her will.
Then the pair had a falling-out and Amanda Rist, now 28, left the home.
Mom successfully sued daughter for unpaid bills and rent. And the daughter sued her mother for the violin.
Amanda Rist declined to comment for this story, but in court documents she claimed the violin was a gift and that she is its true owner.
Douglas County Court Judge Susanna Meissner-Cutler wasn’t convinced of that but didn’t want to deprive Amanda Rist of its use.
“The court finds that it’s a very unusual situation, and a very unfortunate situation, because I can honestly say that most parents, when they buy their child a violin to use, that that violin becomes that child’s, particularly when they continue to use it,” Meissner-Cutler said, according to court transcripts. “The court finds that the violin belongs to Carol Rist, but that that violin is given to the use of Amanda as long as she plays and uses that violin.”
A Douglas County District Court later upheld the lower court’s decision, relying on a case that involved a disputed piece of real estate.
There are a bundle of rights associated with landownership: water rights, mineral rights, leasing rights, possession and use, and more. So, to lose the right to possession doesn’t mean losing all rights of ownership.
But DeRee says household items have historically been treated differently.
“I don’t see how you can do that with personal property,” she said. “You either own it or you don’t.”
Jessica Fender
Sad situation any time families end up in court against each other.
Apparently the judge does not agree, but I think daughter should either pay Mom full current market value or give the violin back. The first lawsuit when Mom went after the daughter for rent and unpaid bills was a good indication that this is not a happy family and it goes much deeper than money issues. Court should have ruled based on true ownership and set aside the fact these two women are related by blood. If they want to be estranged, treat them as strangers.
Mom purchased all the instuments for the kids to encourage them to love music. That doesn’t make a $12,000 violin a gift. I feel the daughter has taken advantage and should be made to give back the insturment. The courts were wrong here and mostly the daughter was wrong here.
How can there be any question? The mom owns the violin and the kid must return it. Simple.
Asinine decision. Should have just cut it in half.
It’s amazing what passes for a judge now days. Bizarre ruling which sets a horrible precedent. You either own something or you don’t and a gift is a gift. Had she ruled the kid gets the violin for the term of the insurance policy I could see that. Had she ruled it was a gift that would make sense. This is just lame.
Since the mother owns the violin I’m wondering how it will be handled when she dies and it is a part of her estate.
Will her Will be what determines it’s disposition? Or will ownership automatically transfer to the daughter?
And what of it’s position as an asset if the mother goes bankrupt?
And a few other interesting questions as well.
Great picture of the mother lovingly caressing … the violin!
A picture is worth 1000 words. When material things mean more than your children, ones priorities are completely out of balance.
I wonder how much she spent on attorneys?
Shame on these judges. This is the problem with the courts today!
Give the lady back her violin! This is no different than letting a minor use a car. The minor buys the Ins and drives the car. As the minor gets older and becomes an adult, that car still belongs to the parants. What a little brat! Let your brothers and sisters use moms violin!!!
That seems to say it all. Parents indulge daughter to adulthood. Daughter gets mad and moves out. To teach some responsibility about bills, mom sues daughter and wins. Daughter gets vindictive and sues mom back.
What if mom were still making payments on the violin? Would the judge order the mom to continue to make payments on the violin that the daughter was allowed to use?
Boy, does this set a precedent – all the stuff your parents allowed you to use as a kid you get to use into adulthood. Your bedroom furniture, your tommy-tippy cup, and the TV you watched Sesame Street on – all yours to use to get back at your parents if you have a mind to.
This should certainly give jail house lawyers something to occupy their time and mess with the system. It might even get them out on field trips to county court.
What a Mom! Suing her daughter for rent and unpaid bills and then fighting over an old violin she bought for 4,900 (she bought 5 violins!). Your children are way more important then money or property; that’s if you want a loving family around you when you get older and beyond. This is a nonsensical lawsuit by the mother!
I would rather give my son/daughter a car (or other stuff) than ruin the warmth of the family. My logic – I am not going to take the violin or the car with me when I die (or has that changed for this mom)?
From a musician’s standpoint, I disagree with most commenters and their logic here. I’ve been playing instruments since the 4th grade. My parents bought better instruments as I got better. Granted, none are worth 5 figures (or appreciated in value), but some are worth 4. While I’m not a professional musician, they have never asked me to buy an instrument from them or return one. In fact, I’m pretty sure they’re happy when I send them pictures of me playing as an adult- it means they were successful at promoting a lifelong hobby and that their investment paid off because they taught me a skill I can enjoy throughout life.
Am I being myopic/ jaded because of my experiences? I don’t think so. But again, my instruments are worth much less than the violin in this case! (Pun slightly intended).
This was a beautiful opportunity for this young lady to demonstrate that she is a competent adult instead of a 28 year old adolescent. A lot of things that look like a “win” now, will come back to bite your b__t. If mom is a grouch about it, so what. Get a life, give her back the thing and get your own. How profitable is it to turn everything into “Custer’s Last”. Hopefully this will encourage parents to reconsider loaning or allowing the use of anything of significant value without more specific conditions.
I don’t think it is fair to judge or take sides based on the information presented here. No one knows what the dynamics are like inside that family. Maybe the daughter is selfish and immature, maybe the mother is narcissistic and controlling, maybe both and maybe something else altogether. Regarding the property issue, does it really matter? Is the property issue more important than the relational issue? As a mother and a daughter, I am having a hard time understanding what the mother hoped to gain by taking her daughter to court. A violin? To teach a lesson? Validation?
I just re-read the article and realize it was the daughter who sued the mother for the violin. The spirit of my earlier comments still stand. This family needs counseling, not a courtroom.