[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

To me the most interesting issue to arise from this thread is what liability, if any, a grading company has for misdating a card. While not in any way saying that that is what happened in the case of the Reccius Wagner (and to the contrary I applaud Hal for the sensational research he did), I find the question intriguing. From my perspective, while I respect the view that the grading company would have an exposure, I can see serious problems with this position, the most serious being that the main role of the grading company was to determine the condition and authenticity of the card, as well as whether it showed evidence of tampering. The date they happen to put on the label is ancillary to this service and, arguably, should not cause them legal exposure. If it were anything other than that, why would a grading company for a nominal fee possibly agree to slab a never-before-seen card with a potential value in the tens of thousands of dollars? Then there is the question of privity of contract. Even if one were to assume the grading company could be liable (for breach of contract), their contract was with the person who originally submitted the card to them. Therefore, if any other person (e.g., a subsequent purchaser) brought the claim, the grading company would argue how can they be in breach of contract with a person with whom they never entered into a contract? The subsequent purchaser would then have to either require the person who originally submitted the card for slabbing to bring the claim, or try to overcome this problem through other more difficult to establish legal doctrines (e.g., third party beneficiary).

Anyway you look at it, a complicated interesting question that in my view is far from clear cut as to what recourse subsequent purchasers of misdated slabbed cards would have against the grading company.