Memory Lane sold cards they didn't have per SCD

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Yoda

If the cards are not recovered then the carrier will subrogate against BW due to their negligence. The small statutory innkeepers liability limit will not protect BW in this case.

Explain how you come to this conclusion, please. My understanding is that subrogees are subject to all the same defenses as their subrogors. If there is an innkeepers' law that protects the hotel against a theft claim from the guest (subrogor), it also protects against the insurer (subrogee) who assumes the claim under an insurance contract.

[Peter_Spaeth]

2011 Ohio Revised Code
Title [47] XLVII OCCUPATIONS - PROFESSIONS
Chapter 4721: INNKEEPERS
4721.03 Limit of liability as to certain property.

Universal Citation: OH Rev Code § 4721.03
The liability of an innkeeper whether person, partnership, or corporation, for loss of or injury to personal property placed in his care by his guests other than that described in sections 4721.01 and 4721.02 of the Revised Code, shall be that of a depositary for hire. Liability shall not exceed one hundred fifty dollars for each trunk and its contents, fifty dollars for each valise and its contents, and ten dollars for each box, bundle, or package, and contents, so placed in his care, unless he has consented in writing with such guest to assume a greater liability.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

2011 Ohio Revised Code
Title [47] XLVII OCCUPATIONS - PROFESSIONS
Chapter 4721: INNKEEPERS
4721.03 Limit of liability as to certain property.

Universal Citation: OH Rev Code § 4721.03
The liability of an innkeeper whether person, partnership, or corporation, for loss of or injury to personal property placed in his care by his guests other than that described in sections 4721.01 and 4721.02 of the Revised Code, shall be that of a depositary for hire. Liability shall not exceed one hundred fifty dollars for each trunk and its contents, fifty dollars for each valise and its contents, and ten dollars for each box, bundle, or package, and contents, so placed in his care, unless he has consented in writing with such guest to assume a greater liability.

I am no data scientist or nothing but if I do the math on that one...hang on a sec...Well anyway that is not much coverage but every dollar counts.

Based on the info that we have, this really sounds like liability to the consignors is with ML, the company, and not anyone else.

[Exhibitman]

Unless there is a baseball card exception or a written agreement between ML and BW to take on a $2mm liability, I am guessing that the hotel owners are not losing sleep over the possibility of being sued. Holding on to their wallets because they have a damn thief in the house, but still sleeping.

Oh, and I think it has gotten a bit lost in all of this, so let's say it again: whoever stole this stuff should be tossed in the can and forced to sort 1989 Donruss sets until he, she or they go blind.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

2011 Ohio Revised Code
Title [47] XLVII OCCUPATIONS - PROFESSIONS
Chapter 4721: INNKEEPERS
4721.03 Limit of liability as to certain property.

Universal Citation: OH Rev Code § 4721.03
The liability of an innkeeper whether person, partnership, or corporation, for loss of or injury to personal property placed in his care by his guests other than that described in sections 4721.01 and 4721.02 of the Revised Code, shall be that of a depositary for hire. Liability shall not exceed one hundred fifty dollars for each trunk and its contents, fifty dollars for each valise and its contents, and ten dollars for each box, bundle, or package, and contents, so placed in his care, unless he has consented in writing with such guest to assume a greater liability.

You can tell that one hasn't been updated since the early 1900s.

[Yoda]

What you say is right, but what I was try to say is that the insurer will subrogate if if can be proven in a court of law that BW was legally negligent by not providing the due diligence necessary in their legal duty to protect guests and their property.
What I wonder, as I keep wandering around this scenario, is if the cards are recovered, after all the legal entanglements are settled, will the cards be returned to the consignors or will ML start a new auction? Maybe I need a new hobby.

[Yoda]

Inland marine or transit policies always provide coverage not only while in transit but also in storage for a limited period of time, usually 60 days.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Yoda

Inland marine or transit policies always provide coverage not only while in transit but also in storage for a limited period of time, usually 60 days.

Not familiar with an Inland Marine policies but have seen a transit policy or two and none provided for coverage after the item was signed for. Interesting info however on the Inland Marine coverage that they will cover for up to 60 days after delivery.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Yoda

What you say is right, but what I was try to say is that the insurer will subrogate if if can be proven in a court of law that BW was legally negligent by not providing the due diligence necessary in their legal duty to protect guests and their property.
What I wonder, as I keep wandering around this scenario, is if the cards are recovered, after all the legal entanglements are settled, will the cards be returned to the consignors or will ML start a new auction? Maybe I need a new hobby.

ML has already said that they will basically give winning bidders right of first refusal at their winning price.

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

ML has already said that they will basically give winning bidders right of first refusal at their winning price.

I also wonder if ML will remove the "sale" price from the auction of these cards in the future. As of now, they have not.