Heritage putting up junk on their website for all to see. fake ALI

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by toybulldog

From first-hand experience I can tell you that statement is far from the truth. After being involved in a lawsuit concerning the autograph of multiple boxing champion Robert Fitzsimmons...

http://www.fighttoys.com/lawsuit.htm

Your link does not discuss the outcome of the lawsuit. Why?

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by mighty bombjack

Your link does not discuss the outcome of the lawsuit. Why?

It certainly does. The court found for the defendant, and against PSA.

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

It certainly does. The court found for the defendant, and against PSA.

Ah, I had to go back and I now see the link within the link that says as much.

Very glad to see that. The court should very well have found what they did. However, I do feel the need to point out that they did not find anything against PSA. The court merely and rightfully stated that PSA is rendering an opinion, nothing more or less, which is not enough to show that the defendant acted fraudulently.

[David Atkatz]

You are correct, Wayne. I shouldn't have phrased it as I did.

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by mighty bombjack

Your link does not discuss the outcome of the lawsuit. Why?

psa didnt show up in court to help bolster the plaintiffs case, they werent required to, but they didnt break their legs trying to get to the courthouse either, if you know what i mean.

all the defendant had to do is show the multitude of prior errors by the authentication company. He showed the court that the opinion of the company, with no reasoning or proof to back up their opinion other than vague terms that mean nothing, was backed by nothing meaningful and their so called expertise should be thrown out, which it was.

but it was not a good day for the validity of psa rejection letters as far as a court is concerned, and if psa would have went there to testify on behalf of the plaintiff, then you really would have seen a show for better or for worse. I would love to question them as to their processes and procedures.

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by travrosty

psa didnt show up in court to help bolster the plaintiffs case, they werent required to, but they didnt break their legs trying to get to the courthouse either, if you know what i mean.

all the defendant had to do is show the multitude of prior errors by the authentication company. He showed the court that the opinion of the company, with no reasoning or proof to back up their opinion other than vague terms that mean nothing, was backed by nothing meaningful and their so called expertise should be thrown out, which it was.

but it was not a good day for the validity of psa rejection letters as far as a court is concerned, and if psa would have went there to testify on behalf of the plaintiff, then you really would have seen a show for better or for worse. I would love to question them as to their processes and procedures.

But see, this is just it: PSA is the first to say that their opinion SHOULD NOT hold up in a court of law. The dumbass who tried to sue your boy wasted his money twice.

It would do a lot of people in this hobby good to read about that joke of a civil lawsuit.

[Big Dave]

I assume that person will not be wasting his money on those pretty sorry authenticaters again.