Coach's Corner - The Perfect Crime?

[jt39]

If you can pardon the overly lawyerly post that follows, I've offered a few off the cuff thoughts on this (not legal advice in any manner, and totally hypothetical based on what people have said in the thread):

Though this is a relatively small, non-traditional target for class action (which would make it tough to find a lawyer, I'd think), class action doesn't strike me as totally implausible here -- may make sense to define the class in relation to a particularly egregious authenticator(s) and name them as well. The # and type of items sold is easy enough to identify and plead, and you can pick and choose amongst items so as to define the most desirable class -- one which is sufficiently large, sufficiently easy to connect (e.g. signatures of certain oft-sold players), etc. Finding a lead plaintiff may not be too tough since anyone buying the stuff is already on the internet and I'm sure plenty have complained over the years. They need to have been genuinely swindled though. Find an expert who can attest that all of the autographs in question are fakes and then list them in the complaint (here again, their internet presence really helps with pleading sufficiently specific facts -- you could even list out auction #'s and include pictures of the items in question).

The real kicker would be identifying the sources of the purported memorabilia. Detective work on this can't be too tough -- where do packages to the bad authenticators come from? Do trucks pull up to/drive away from, say, this Morales guy's office that someone can follow? I'm obviously not giving any kind of advice to pursue such actions, which are undoubtedly more appropriate for governmental authorities and would require careful scrutiny from an attorney before an individual pursued them. But if you could define the class as people who purchased items that were produced by Counterfeiter Doe, certified by Joe Authenticator, and sold by Coach's Corner, you'd be setting yourself up well on some major stumbling blocks to class action certification (commonality, typicality). Not to mention setting up a nice array of causes of action -- RICO, conspiracy to commit fraud, fraud, in addition to breach of contract. The whole point of conspiracy causes of action is to prevent illegal actors from avoiding the force of the law by craftily breaking up their criminal enterprise into separate parts, then claiming they are unrelated and hiding the connections. That is exactly what this is (hypothetically). If this is actually a conspiracy, some well-thought-out, yet totally legal for a non-governmental-official investigation may well uncover the type of info needed to survive a motion to dismiss.

I would note that there is nothing stopping a truly aggrieved individual from bringing a lawsuit relating to their own item. Sure, there may not be a ton of money in it and that may make it hard to find a lawyer, but if someone is pissed enough, and/or spent enough money, it would be much easier to get a case off the ground (and, most importantly, gain access to discovery from the company) if the case was brought by an individual. Of course, you'd face a fight on the scope of discovery, but you'd have a good chance at getting at the juicy info on the connection points in the alleged scheme. May not get a lot of $$$ in the first case (unless you can win punitives), but would be doing a ton of damage to their (hypothetical) criminal enterprise -- if any nasty info gets brought to light, the whole house of cards may well come down.

Finally, someone mentioned that they only trade on "opinions," they don't actually assert that the items are legit. First, that's why you bring in the authenticator. Second, you can allege (and seek to prove) that they know the items are fake, and that they know that the authenticator knows the items are fake -- and therefore that withholding that information and passing them off as items for which an authenticator has issued an "opinion" of veracity is itself a misrepresentation. Now, fraud has heightened pleading requirements (i.e., you have to allege more specific facts in your suit ... can't just say "he lied!"). But an individual asserting breach of contract on that basis may well be able to go after this as a misrepresentation without meeting that burden. (I.e., you contracted for an item that was truly "a baseball that Joe Authenticator has opined was signed by Mickey Mantle," when in fact what you got was "a baseball that Coach's Corner knew was a fake and which it knew had been counterfeited and which it knew had been knowingly fraudulently designated as real by Joe Authenticator".)

[sports-rings]

I get SPAM from them all the time. By law, I believe they are required to list their address and also the option to opt out of mailings. They do neither. I have even emailed them to remove me. Is there any way to get them in trouble with the law for spamming?

You can report the emails to spamcop.net

They will handle contacting the appropriate network administrator and if the spam continues, they will black-list the spammer and send the name of the spammer to many of the large isp's.

[sports-rings]

May not get a lot of $$$ in the first case (unless you can win punitives), but would be doing a ton of damage to their (hypothetical) criminal enterprise -- if any nasty info gets brought to light, the whole house of cards may well come down.

Here's what I don't get: I read this week that MLB warned a NJ company to stop selling Jeter autographs that they paid him to sign on "3,000 hit balls"... A few weeks ago I read that Memory Lane was suing classmates.com for using the words "Memory Lane" in their marketing and web site.

You would think, in the big business of sports auctions, a company like Heritage (that has a staff of lawyers) or some of the other big auction houses in our hobby would step up and do something on this matter in a court of law.

[bbcard1]

If I were in the FBI, I would want to be one of the agents who investigates bad baseball memorabilia dealers and not one of the guys who have to knock heads with Al Capone wannabes. I have a wife and kids...

[Leon]

Great post jt39. Much appreciated. Since I am a strong "supporter" of the FBI's investigation into the hobby I think I understand some of their reasoning on who/why they go after who they do. They can't go after every guy selling $5 fakes. That isn't how we would want our serious tax dollars used by them either. That is for a local police dept and local law enforcement. The CC Auctions meet a few of their criteria but probably not all of them, on their decision to go after them or not. There is almost no doubt they have been looked at though. As stated earlier, and if I remember correctly, it is because these are in fact "opinions" of their experts as to the reason the case would be a tough nut to crack, notwithstanding the comments above. How many times do we see differing expert testimony in court? From what I have seen, as an ordinary layperson, things get pretty muddied up when you have all sorts of experts claiming different outcomes of authentication. I just don't think the FBI wants to go there. Now, if someone can show where CC unequivocally ripped someone off for 150k, and it's an open and shut case not involving only an "opinion", then maybe they would take a more formal look. Also, it's not the FBI themselves that bring charges, they just give their information to the US District Attorney and then they make the decision to indict or not. I might get some clarification on this and come back to this thread with it....but I am fairly confident what I say is true, even if it's not well received. Don't get me wrong, I too know it's obvious that a Cap Anson signed ball shouldn't go for 1/50th of market price, but what can you do if people believe CC's "experts"? It's a shame people don't do their homework and then CC would be out of business and we wouldn't have to discuss their situation.

[jt39]

You would think, in the big business of sports auctions, a company like Heritage (that has a staff of lawyers) or some of the other big auction houses in our hobby would step up and do something on this matter in a court of law.

The problem here is that they don't have a private right of action to bring. Even if Coach's Corner has used bad tactics in a way that undermines the business done by legitimate auction houses, it is highly unlikely that it rises to the level of a tort. (Check wikipedia for "tort law" for general reference.) And unlike purchasers of the products, there is no contractual relationship to base a suit on.

As stated earlier, and if I remember correctly, it is because these are in fact "opinions" of their experts as to the reason the case would be a tough nut to crack, notwithstanding the comments above. How many times do we see differing expert testimony in court? From what I have seen, as an ordinary layperson, things get pretty muddied up when you have all sorts of experts claiming different outcomes of authentication.

No question about it, there will be experts on the other side if this matter ever sees a courtroom. Seems you can find an expert who will say just about anything -- it comes down to how good their analysis is, how well it is presented, and how credible they are. But the battle of the experts would undoubtedly be the central issue.

That is why I emphasized the importance of finding the source of the forged materials. I think it is highly likely that they come from several common sources. If you can find them (should be easy enough by seeking records of who has consigned and then subpoenaing/deposing them), and show that they aren't sitting on some treasure trove of old Mickey Mantle autographed balls, but are, rather, signing them themselves by the hundreds, then it becomes a much harder argument for their expert to make that they are legit.

Food for thought, not legal advice.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by jt39

That is why I emphasized the importance of finding the source of the forged materials. I think it is highly likely that they come from several common sources. If you can find them (should be easy enough by seeking records of who has consigned and then subpoenaing/deposing them), and show that they aren't sitting on some treasure trove of old Mickey Mantle autographed balls, but are, rather, signing them themselves by the hundreds, then it becomes a much harder argument for their expert to make that they are legit.

Food for thought, not legal advice.

I will refer once again to the e mail that was in circulation some time ago, in which alleged sources of CC material were named.
While the names were known to me, and 3 of the 4 did not surprise me at all, the e mail lacked any sort of proof.
So while C, M, and S may be the suppliers of CC, until someone can bring that proof to the government, it will be tough to take CC down.