Legal Precedent on Clerical Errors.....eg: Accidently Mispriced Collectables

dragon

Does anyone here remember a high profile court case from several years ago regarding a Nolan Ryan(?) rookie card that was accidently sold in a store for a fraction of it's market value by a sales clerk that misread the marked price?

It's been quite awhile, but I think it went something like this:

A kid was in a store that sold baseball cards and looked at this expensive card, he asked the sales clerk the price and the clerk must have mistakenly thought the price was marked $100.00 instead of either $1000.00 or $10000.00 (I forgot which). The kid knowing that the clerk had mistakenly mispriced the very expensive card came back later that day and purchased it for $100.00

Apparently the store owner found out of this obvious mistake made by the clerk later that day and contacted the buyer to inform him that the card he purchased was accidently mispriced by his sales clerk and that the actual price was much higher, and asked that he return the card to the store as a clear error was made. The kid refused saying that he bought the card in good faith, paid for it, and that it was his.

The store owner subsequently filed a lawsuit against the buyer claiming that an obvious clerical error was made regarding the sale price by his clerk, and that the sale was therefore not valid or binding. It turned out to be a long drawn out court case if I remember, and in the end the judge found in favor of the store owner.

Again, if I remember correctly, the judges reasoning for his finding was that this was a clear case of a simple clerical error and that a sales contract between buyer and seller is not valid or binding if it is later discovered that a clear and obvious clerical error was made regarding the sales price. So the store owner ended up getting his expensive card back and refunded the sales price to the buyer.

I don't know if I got all the details of the story exactly right, but I think I'm kinda close, and I only bring this up because of a recent thread brought up here recently with a similar circumstance.

As for me personally, I wouldn't want an item that I knew was mistakenly mispriced by a large margin by the seller as a result of a simple mistake, and I would bring it to his/her attention, although I know others have differing opinions on this subject.

dragon

DCAMFranklin

In the DLRC case, the error was not a clerical error. The error was made by the firm's own President (NOT some flunky clerk), by his own admission.

DCAMFranklin

That's what I am wondering!!

greghansen

The legal principle involved is called a 'unilateral mistake'. In some jurisdictions when one party to a contract enters into the agreement because of a unilateral mistake, they are entitled to relief. The mistake must relate to some material aspect of the agreement (price would definately be material) and the mistake must not be due to any failure to use ordinary care. I stayed out of the other link but since its come up again, Ill just say the legal resolution of verbal contracts where there has been an alleged unilateral mistake of material fact, are very fact dependant and are decided strictly on a case by case basis. You can find legal precedent to back up either point of view because the legal precedents set forth general propositions of law.

tradedollarnut

In the DLRC case, the error was not a clerical error. The error was made by the firm's own President (NOT some flunky clerk), by his own admission.

I think you don't understand the legal definition of "clerical error".

Nedcoinage

you have to wonder about a dealer who would bring a kid to court. i would rather take a loss than lose customers.

Ned

joeyuk

I thought the card was auctioned and they split the proceeds with the store owners share going to charity.

Veep

Dragon,

You're pretty much right on. It was indeed a Nolan Ryan rookie card (which also features Jerry Koosman by the way). It was sold for $100 but worth $1,000.

Veep