Shanus-REA suit

[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?

[Snapolit1]

Kind of a sign of the times I guess. Different sliding scales for conduct if the person charged is on your team or on the other team. If it's your friend the parish priest/rabbi or youth organization volunteer charged with sexual abuse, you disbelieve or find some reason to excuse the conduct. If it's your public figure charged with wrongdoing, the man or woman you support, you look the other way or minimize the conduct. "Matt Lauer? Oh, he's a nice guy. I can't believe he would do that. " If it's your guy caught using PEDS you continue to slam Bonds and Sosa but welcome your guy back with open arms when the suspension is over. Charge other people with wrongdoing all day long, but when the shoe is squarely on the other foot you yawn loudly, put your head down and quietly walk away.

[slidekellyslide]

I think what you have here is a lot of people who are friends with both Rob and Corey. Also the story is still a bit fuzzy as to what exactly happened. Not a peep out of Peter Nash who loves to take a swipe at Rob with every breath he takes.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

I think what you have here is a lot of people who are friends with both Rob and Corey. Also the story is still a bit fuzzy as to what exactly happened. Not a peep out of Peter Nash who loves to take a swipe at Rob with every breath he takes.

He is conflicted, to say the least. I wouldn't take his lack of commentary to mean anything.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

I think what you have here is a lot of people who are friends with both Rob and Corey. Also the story is still a bit fuzzy as to what exactly happened. Not a peep out of Peter Nash who loves to take a swipe at Rob with every breath he takes.

What is fuzzy about it? It's right there in the amended complaint and verdict sheet, a federal jury found that Rob. L and REA committed fraud by misrepresenting that two specific items had sold at auction, with the intent of inducing Corey S. to rely on those "realized" prices in making other bids. And awarded x in actual damages and y in punitive damages. I think your first explanation is far more likely than the second. Or, the fact that Rob. L is out of the hobby.

[calvindog]

A civil verdict is significantly different than a criminal investigation followed by indictment and admission via guilty plea. Many of Corey's allegations were dismissed, none were investigated criminally and the one that did result in a verdict was achieved by a significantly lesser standard than beyond a reasonable doubt. And it will be appealed and, unlike a guilty plea, might be reversed. It's not a surprise to me that the reaction is not as cut and dry as you'd think it should be. Hell, after all, some on Net 54 were still supporting Mastro even at sentencing.