It looks like ebay is removing negative feedback for Probstein123

[bigtrain]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Tom---we need the full cite to the case

Here you go Al,

497 U.S. 1 (1990)

[FSF]

While Probstein is by no means perfect, I for one am very glad that he exists. I certainly don't want to take on the task of auctioning off unwanted items from my collection to dozens of different parties. The time alone is a huge waste, let alone the aggravation of it all.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by FSF

While Probstein is by no means perfect, I for one am very glad that he exists. I certainly don't want to take on the task of auctioning off unwanted items from my collection to dozens of different parties. The time alone is a huge waste, let alone the aggravation of it all.

Please read the rules and especially the one at the top of every page. If you give any opinion of a person or company you need your full name in your post.....this is for future reference. And had you said something negative your name would be put in your post. Nothing personal and welcome to the forum.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by bigtrain

Here you go Al,

497 U.S. 1 (1990)

Tom, I am having flashbacks to the hours on end spent in LexisNexis and Westlaw while in college.

[Volod]

Originally Posted by bigtrain

Here you go Al,

497 U.S. 1 (1990)

Al, or Tom: Is that case information available in layman's terms? That is, a brief account of the facts involved and the parties' dispute? I am curious because I happened to work for the Lorain Journal at one time, but it was
sometime after the date cited, so I had not heard of the case or its hearing by the Supremes.