​

Rubber Band Ball Custody and High-Conflict Office Artifact Litigation

​

At 1-800-PATRICK WINS BIG, PLLC, we maintain a focused and unmatched practice devoted to the representation of creators, custodians, and aggrieved stakeholders in disputes involving the custody, possession, and control of rubber band balls and similarly situated dependent office artifacts.

We understand that rubber band ball cases are never “just about the rubber band ball.” They are about control, legacy, ownership, leverage, and power dynamics within closed environments. These matters routinely arise in professional settings where informal arrangements give way to conflict, concealment, and unilateral action. We have extensive experience navigating precisely these conditions.

Our firm regularly handles matters involving disputed conception, joint creation, and contested custodial claims over rubber band balls that were conceived and developed in shared workspaces. We are particularly experienced in cases where one party initiates creation and another later asserts dominion, attempts to rewrite history, or absconds with the child under cover of routine office activity.

We litigate Rubber Band Ball Custody Actions under both equitable principles and by direct analogy to the Michigan Child Custody Act, including full best-interest analyses addressing emotional attachment, stability of environment, continuity of care, moral fitness of the parties, and risk of concealment or fragmentation. We are comfortable seeking sole legal and physical custody where joint arrangements have failed or trust has been irreparably broken.

In addition to custody, we aggressively pursue Replevin and Return of Dependent Property actions to secure the immediate recovery of wrongfully retained rubber band balls. Where the child’s whereabouts are unknown, we routinely seek court-ordered disclosure, inspection, and preservation to prevent further endangerment or dissipation.

Our practice also includes Conversion and Civil Theft Claims arising from the intentional exercise of dominion over rubber band balls inconsistent with the rights of their creators. We pursue full compensatory damages and, where appropriate, treble damages to reflect the seriousness of the misconduct and deter future interference.

We have significant experience demanding and enforcing Accountings and Full Disclosure related to rubber band ball–related assets, including derivative structures, replicas, photographs, internal communications, security footage, desk contents, and any documentation reflecting handling, movement, or concealment of the child. We do not tolerate incomplete answers or selective memory.

Where the loss or disappearance of a rubber band ball causes emotional harm, distress, or reputational injury, we pursue Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress claims grounded in outrageous conduct, reckless disregard, and deliberate concealment. We understand that the emotional component of these cases is not incidental. It is central.

Finally, we are deeply experienced in Emergency Motions, Preservation Orders, and Litigation Holds designed to freeze the status quo, prevent spoliation, and force accountability. Rubber band ball cases move quickly once concealment begins. We move faster.

This is not a novelty practice. This is a serious area of law involving real stakes, real leverage, and real consequences. If a rubber band ball you helped create has been lost, taken, hidden, or treated as disposable, we know exactly how to proceed.

We don’t negotiate with prey.
We recover the child.