Shanus-REA suit

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

I was a bit steamed when I wrote that, Leon. And my apologies for the F bomb.

What other forms of recourse are there besides civil court? Can an auction house and a complainant enter into binding arbitration?

Bill, sorry I missed your question, private parties can certainly agree to arbitrate almost any dispute, and I see no reason they could not have done so here. However, it's frequently the case that one side, or both, perceives that they will have the advantage with a jury. Parties can also enlist a mediator to help them try to resolve their dispute, and that's popular these days in certain types of cases and sometimes useful. Certainly both alternatives are more cost-effective.

[oldjudge]

I thought the suit was about Corey recovering what he paid for some trophy balls which were alleged to have been painted with a type of paint that did not exist in the 19th century? Am I wrong, or was this part of the suit dismissed?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Count I. The case went to trial on Count II.

[Leon]

Jay,
Here are the allegations in paragraphs 29 and 30 of the First Amended Complaint brought by Corey.
Corey never bought the trophy balls where there was no sale with Nash. He bought others after that. The jury felt he relied on the false sale of the balls for future purchases, with clear and convincing evidence (according to the statute that had to be overcome). My guess is that if the transcripts ever come out they will be interesting to a few, myself included.

To summarize even more -
First count, for lulling him into giving up his claim against Mastro on the balls he did buy. Judge didn't buy it.
Second count, for manipulating the market and inducing him to overpay on other stuff. Jury bought it.


Hope that helps clear a little of this mess up. It is worth repeating that appeals are expected.

Originally Posted by oldjudge

I thought the suit was about Corey recovering what he paid for some trophy balls which were alleged to have been painted with a type of paint that did not exist in the 19th century? Am I wrong, or was this part of the suit dismissed?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Count I was about different balls that Corey did buy. The "1861 Trophy Ball" and the "1853 Trophy Ball."

[Peter_Spaeth]

Leon -- the lulling fraud count did not go to the jury. The court decided it on summary judgment.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Leon -- the lulling fraud count did not go to the jury. The court decided it on summary judgment.

FIxed thanks. Now back to cards.

[oldjudge]

What happens with attorney's fees on a case like this? Is the winning side's fees paid by the losing side, or is it up to the judge to award fees if he/she sees fit? If the latter, were they awarded in this case?

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Leon

Jay,
Here are the allegations in paragraphs 29 and 30 of the First Amended Complaint brought by Corey.
Corey never bought the trophy balls where there was no sale with Nash. He bought others after that. The jury felt he relied on the false sale of the balls for future purchases, with clear and convincing evidence (according to the statute that had to be overcome). My guess is that if the transcripts ever come out they will be interesting to a few, myself included.

To summarize even more -
First count, for lulling him into giving up his claim against Mastro on the balls he did buy. Judge didn't buy it.
Second count, for manipulating the market and inducing him to overpay on other stuff. Jury bought it.


Hope that helps clear a little of this mess up. It is worth repeating that appeals are expected.

Point #11 is the scary one, for me.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Leon

Jay,
Here are the allegations in paragraphs 29 and 30 of the First Amended Complaint brought by Corey.
Corey never bought the trophy balls where there was no sale with Nash. He bought others after that. The jury felt he relied on the false sale of the balls for future purchases, with clear and convincing evidence (according to the statute that had to be overcome). My guess is that if the transcripts ever come out they will be interesting to a few, myself included.

To summarize even more -
First count, for lulling him into giving up his claim against Mastro on the balls he did buy. Judge didn't buy it.
Second count, for manipulating the market and inducing him to overpay on other stuff. Jury bought it.


Hope that helps clear a little of this mess up. It is worth repeating that appeals are expected.

Something's missing there right?
What's shown makes it look like someone consigned stuff, shilled it, never paid. Then a second person relies on those sales and sues because he overpaid? And that all the items involved were fake? Sounds like the AH is being punished for what the consigner did.
Not that it isn't the law, it just seems less than fair (I know by now that those things aren't always aligned)

[Exhibitman]

I think it is that Rob knew that the earlier sales never took but reported them as genuine sales so that bidders would rely on the bogus report in setting a bid level on the next items up for sale.

[mantlefan]

I've been away and I've read through this tonight. I get the feeling that this thread was left to die on the vine. Not sure of the intent. The "Law" is a complexity of which I have very little specific knowledge and I appreciate the explanations by all the attorneys on this Forum. I'm frustrated by all the backbiting and hijackings on this thread; I am also surprised that the OP, RL, has not chosen to comment:

We have no fancy PR firm (and don’t need one) and I can’t discuss details of a lawsuit that is filed against me because it just isn’t done, but I can assure any and all that this has NO merit.

Well, the case is over now and the verdict has been heard and I wonder what Rob's response will be...or if there ever will be a response?

I'm no lawyer, but as a doctor I like to cut to the heart (sorry) of the problem. If I squeeze the data and cut away all the bs, I see this:




A jury has determined that RL is guilty of misrepresentation in an auction-related matter. I know appeal, re-trial, yadda ,yadda, yadda,....but guys, Rob L. has been found guilty of doing something that is contradictory to the core values of his profession. That's huge. Are there other misdeeds? I don't know, but I do know that according to a court of law RL has betrayed his client on at least one occasion.

Again, nothing here at all about Brian Dwyer who is one of the most honest men I know.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Frank, when I posted about the verdict I expected more discussion as well if for no other reason than the prominence of the parties and the nature of the allegations, but perhaps because Rob L. is out of the business it is of little interest?

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Bill, sorry I missed your question, private parties can certainly agree to arbitrate almost any dispute, and I see no reason they could not have done so here. However, it's frequently the case that one side, or both, perceives that they will have the advantage with a jury. Parties can also enlist a mediator to help them try to resolve their dispute, and that's popular these days in certain types of cases and sometimes useful. Certainly both alternatives are more cost-effective.

I'm not sure I agree with that. I don't have a problem mediating but I will never voluntarily participate in an arbitration. Yes, I am sure that the fees in this case were high. But that can also occur in a long, ugly arbitration. I have a friend who is arguing an appeal of an arbitration award he won in a business dispute at the 10th Circuit next week. Its been going on for years. His fees are huge, as are the fees of the other side's attorney, I'm sure. Plus, you also get to pay the fees of the arbitrator or the arbitration panel if there is more than one. I also think that process is skewed in favor of those who participate in arbitration frequently. No thanks. I'll take a jury any day.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

I'm not sure I agree with that. I don't have a problem mediating but I will never voluntarily participate in an arbitration. Yes, I am sure that the fees in this case were high. But that can also occur in a long, ugly arbitration. I have a friend who is arguing an appeal of an arbitration award he won in a business dispute at the 10th Circuit next week. Its been going on for years. His fees are huge, as are the fees of the other side's attorney, I'm sure. Plus, you also get to pay the fees of the arbitrator or the arbitration panel if there is more than one. I also think that process is skewed in favor of those who participate in arbitration frequently. No thanks. I'll take a jury any day.

The commercial arbitrations I have been involved in, and I am not saying they were inexpensive by any means, greatly streamlined the motion practice and massive discovery that make complex civil litigation so inordinately expensive. It may not be true in every instance, but assuming you have a dispute that isn't going to be resolved by dispositive motion or settlement, arbitration usually will end up costing less in my opinion. Now of course as you rightly point out there may be other reasons you would still prefer a jury or bench trial, no question.

[frankbmd]

Are the baseball challenge rules mediated in NYC more akin to an arbitration panel or a jury trial?

I would say an arbitration panel in NYC and a jury trial in the broadcast booth.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Bill, sorry I missed your question, private parties can certainly agree to arbitrate almost any dispute, and I see no reason they could not have done so here. However, it's frequently the case that one side, or both, perceives that they will have the advantage with a jury. Parties can also enlist a mediator to help them try to resolve their dispute, and that's popular these days in certain types of cases and sometimes useful. Certainly both alternatives are more cost-effective.

Thanks, Peter. I guess, in the same position, I'd go for a jury trial, even though it might drag on for years. In arbitration, if you're not happy with the resolution, you're stuck, as there's no appeal.

Back to the topic at hand.