AITAH for taking my BIL to small claims court for a prank?
The core event involves the Original Poster (OP) being subjected to a prank by his brother-in-law (BIL) during a family barbecue. While the OP was asleep and shirtless, the BIL applied super glue to his belly b**ton.
This seemingly harmless prank escalated when the OP accidentally touched the glue, causing it to adhere to his skin.
The immediate aftermath required the OP to seek emergency medical treatment to safely remove the hardened glue, resulting in a substantial medical bill.
When the BIL refused to cover the $2,253 cost, the OP escalated the matter by taking him to small claims court, which he won.
This legal action has caused significant anger within the wife's family, leaving the OP questioning whether his decision to pursue legal recourse was an overreaction.
Subscribe to our Newsletter
Get the latest stories delivered to your inbox.
The OP finds himself in a difficult position, caught between upholding his right to compensation for a non-consensual and damaging prank, and maintaining peace within his wife's family structure.
His action, while legally justified in recovering damages, v***ated the unwritten social contract often expected in family settings regarding minor disputes.
The central debate revolves around where the line should be drawn between personal accountability for harmful actions and the expectation of familial forgiveness or informal resolution.
Readers must weigh whether seeking formal legal judgment against a family member for a prank causing medical expense is an appropriate response, or if it const*tutes an irreparable breach of family harmony.
A Wave of Opinions Just Hit the Thread:
Users didn’t stay quiet — they showed up in full force, mixing support with sharp criticism. From calling out bad behavior to offering real talk, the comments lit up fast.