Hotel sued for causing divorce

[snopes]

Comment: A man stayed at a hotel with a woman who was not his wife and
left behind his wedding ring.

The hotel staff found the ring and called the phone number on file. His
wife answered and said that it couldn't be his ring as he was at a
business conference in another city.

When he returned home his wife presented him with divorce papers and he
sued the hotel for the cost of his divorce (lawyer, court fees, etc.).

Is there any truth to this story?

It's all too neat that it's his wedding ring that was found and not something else (wallet, phone, whatever). Just the kind of detail to put in if you're making the story up.

Wouldn't a traveling businessman engaging in an extramarital affair most likely use his CELL PHONE as a contact number for the hotel?

[snopes]

Originally Posted by rumorbuster

Wouldn't a traveling businessman engaging in an extramarital affair most likely use his CELL PHONE as a contact number for the hotel?

Probably not if the described scenario took place prior to the advent of cell phones.

And nothing absolutely precludes the possibility that a wife might answer her husband's cell phone.

[kitap]

Originally Posted by snopes

Probably not if the described scenario took place prior to the advent of cell phones.

And nothing absolutely precludes the possibility that a wife might answer her husband's cell phone.

Or if he has been there before really on business and that's the phone number he used then and it's still on file.

[A Turtle Named Mack]

Well, whether marriages have been disrupted (or more aptly, the final stroke been delivered) by such calls from hotels, it is extremely unlikely that such a suit would get anywhere. Returning property to its owner is not a cause for liability.

[diddy]

Originally Posted by A Turtle Named Mack

Well, whether marriages have been disrupted (or more aptly, the final stroke been delivered) by such calls from hotels, it is extremely unlikely that such a suit would get anywhere. Returning property to its owner is not a cause for liability.

Especially when a hotel employee could in no way be responsible for knowing if someone was carrying out an affair. Hotels are not marriage police they cannot tell the difference between an affair or a one night stand with a single person or separated.

[kitap]

Originally Posted by diddy

Especially when a hotel employee could in no way be responsible for knowing if someone was carrying out an affair. Hotels are not marriage police they cannot tell the difference between an affair or a one night stand with a single person or separated.

So you're saying I have to stop demanding marriage certificates when I check in couples*? Well, darn.


*I don't really.

[purpleiguana]

Originally Posted by A Turtle Named Mack

Well, whether marriages have been disrupted (or more aptly, the final stroke been delivered) by such calls from hotels, it is extremely unlikely that such a suit would get anywhere. Returning property to its owner is not a cause for liability.

Originally Posted by diddy

Especially when a hotel employee could in no way be responsible for knowing if someone was carrying out an affair. Hotels are not marriage police they cannot tell the difference between an affair or a one night stand with a single person or separated.

Additionally, the hotel in no way tempted, encouraged, or forced this man to cheat on his wife. Hubby (fictitious or not) seems more upset about being caught than losing his wife.