Options
MASTRONET FIRES BACK
.jpg)
theczar
Posts: 1,590 ✭✭
I got this email from Mastronet today
Not taking sides just an interesting FYI
Dear Customer:
As a firm, we have always preferred to handle disputes with professionalism and discretion, even in the infrequent occasion that it is necessary to resolve them in court. Recently, we had what became a very public dispute with a former customer, autograph dealer Bill Daniels. Due to the public nature of this dispute, a number of you have asked about the legitimacy of his claims. Last week, the Honorable Matthew C. Kincaid from the Boone (Indiana) Superior Court issued a 46-page ruling. We thought it appropriate to communicate his findings, and resolution of this dispute, to our customers. Following is a synopsis of the judgment that the Court issued.
The Court found that Daniels’ statements that Mastro Auctions defrauded him, and conspired with PSA/DNA to do so, were defamatory. The Court also found that Daniels “affirmatively sought republication of defamatory statements in national media outlets such as Barron’s and New York Daily News.” In particular, the Court characterized Daniels’ conduct as “picayune, foolish, errant, resultant from a lack of understanding of his rights to publicly declare his complaints outside of a judicial proceeding and overzealous.” As a result, the court held Daniels liable for damages to Mastro Auctions’ reputation in the amount of $1,000.
The Court found that the proposed experts Daniels produced at trial – Richard Simon and Stephen Koschal (whom Daniels had testify that Mastro Auctions sold him forgeries) – were not qualified to render expert opinions. In particular, the Court found that Simon had undergone a “wholesale demolition in his deposition” and that Koschal was “not qualified to render an opinion on anything having to do with autographs.” Simon and Koschal were offered as witnesses after five other proposed experts “all refused to testify on [Daniels’] behalf.”
The Court sanctioned Daniels for his conduct of the litigation during discovery, specifically citing Daniels’ failure to disclose relevant documents timely and to “represent his claimed harm accurately.” As a result, Daniels was fined $2,000.
The Court found that Daniels presented “no evidence” of fraud and that Daniels’ claims that Mastro Auctions defrauded him—and conspired with PSA/DNA to do so--were “false.” The Court entered judgment against Daniels on those claims and awarded no damages.
Daniels was given $608.85 because a small portion of the 2,012 photos Daniels purchased in December 2004 were not as described in the lot description. Mastro Auctions offered to replace those photos shortly after the auction, but Daniels refused.
The only negative of the judgment was that an additional award to Daniels was made on the basis that our catalog stated “LOA from James Spence & Steve Grad / PSA DNA,” but Steve Grad was the only one to physically sign the LOA on behalf of the PSA/DNA team. Our attorneys will ask the judge to reconsider that portion of the ruling.
Overall, Mastro Auctions is very happy with this result. Although it is unfortunate that this dispute had to go all the way to trial, we are pleased that the judge sent what we believe to be a resounding message against Mr. Daniels’ exaggerated claims and conduct of his lawsuit.
Sincerely,
Doug Allen
President
Mastro Auctions
Not taking sides just an interesting FYI
Dear Customer:
As a firm, we have always preferred to handle disputes with professionalism and discretion, even in the infrequent occasion that it is necessary to resolve them in court. Recently, we had what became a very public dispute with a former customer, autograph dealer Bill Daniels. Due to the public nature of this dispute, a number of you have asked about the legitimacy of his claims. Last week, the Honorable Matthew C. Kincaid from the Boone (Indiana) Superior Court issued a 46-page ruling. We thought it appropriate to communicate his findings, and resolution of this dispute, to our customers. Following is a synopsis of the judgment that the Court issued.
The Court found that Daniels’ statements that Mastro Auctions defrauded him, and conspired with PSA/DNA to do so, were defamatory. The Court also found that Daniels “affirmatively sought republication of defamatory statements in national media outlets such as Barron’s and New York Daily News.” In particular, the Court characterized Daniels’ conduct as “picayune, foolish, errant, resultant from a lack of understanding of his rights to publicly declare his complaints outside of a judicial proceeding and overzealous.” As a result, the court held Daniels liable for damages to Mastro Auctions’ reputation in the amount of $1,000.
The Court found that the proposed experts Daniels produced at trial – Richard Simon and Stephen Koschal (whom Daniels had testify that Mastro Auctions sold him forgeries) – were not qualified to render expert opinions. In particular, the Court found that Simon had undergone a “wholesale demolition in his deposition” and that Koschal was “not qualified to render an opinion on anything having to do with autographs.” Simon and Koschal were offered as witnesses after five other proposed experts “all refused to testify on [Daniels’] behalf.”
The Court sanctioned Daniels for his conduct of the litigation during discovery, specifically citing Daniels’ failure to disclose relevant documents timely and to “represent his claimed harm accurately.” As a result, Daniels was fined $2,000.
The Court found that Daniels presented “no evidence” of fraud and that Daniels’ claims that Mastro Auctions defrauded him—and conspired with PSA/DNA to do so--were “false.” The Court entered judgment against Daniels on those claims and awarded no damages.
Daniels was given $608.85 because a small portion of the 2,012 photos Daniels purchased in December 2004 were not as described in the lot description. Mastro Auctions offered to replace those photos shortly after the auction, but Daniels refused.
The only negative of the judgment was that an additional award to Daniels was made on the basis that our catalog stated “LOA from James Spence & Steve Grad / PSA DNA,” but Steve Grad was the only one to physically sign the LOA on behalf of the PSA/DNA team. Our attorneys will ask the judge to reconsider that portion of the ruling.
Overall, Mastro Auctions is very happy with this result. Although it is unfortunate that this dispute had to go all the way to trial, we are pleased that the judge sent what we believe to be a resounding message against Mr. Daniels’ exaggerated claims and conduct of his lawsuit.
Sincerely,
Doug Allen
President
Mastro Auctions
0
Comments
Please bend over with a smile, then Pooffffffff , this thread that is.
From what I know about Richard Simon, he is an expert in his field of autograph authentication.
It's a relatively miniscule judgement. The judge must have felt that he either (1) didn't damadge their reputation all that much or (2) the reputation isn't worth much.
Regards,
Alan
<< <i>still doesn't address them shilling their auctions. >>
Your not very bright. I hope you have proof when someone lets Mastro know you
are defaming thier business on a public message board, far from obscure, that is read by many customers of Mastro.
If you have solid proof, you may be able to go class action with all of the angry customers who would be glad to get involved.
If you dont, you could get/be in a lot of trouble.
Some of guys are waaay to loose in dropping accusations against people.
You have to have proof before you can make those type of statements or I see tears being shed inside a courtroom for someone in the near future.
Loves me some shiny!
Four months after a lawsuit was filed, an Indiana judge rules in the case of Daniels vs Mastro Auctions.
Mastro Auctions did not intend to defraud former customer Bill Daniels when the Indiana dealer purchased a lot of autographs in a 2004 auction.
Boone County, Indiana Superior Court Judge Matthew Kincaid made the 46-page ruling last week, several months after Daniels filed suit over a lot of 2,000 signatures, some of which he claimed weremisrepresented. Daniels claimed 123 photos in the gropu were not in color or of the 8x10 size as was claimed in the catalog description. He claimed others were smudged and perhaps not authentic.
Kincaid ruled the two autograph authenticators offered as prosecution witnesses "possess sufficient skill, knowledge or experience in the fields in which they were asked to render opinions."
The auction company had offered to replace some of the photos but the offer was refused and Daniels filed the lawsuit. Mastro was ordered to pay Daniels $9,000--nearly half of the purchase price, but the dealer was also ordered to pay for $1,000 "defamatory" statements he made and $2,000 for failing to produce documents the court had asked for.
In an e-mail sent to customers Sunday, Mastro Auctions President Doug Allen wrote: "Overall, Mastro Auctions is very happy with this result. Although it is unfortunate that this dispute had to go all the way to trial, we are pleased that the judge sent what we believe to be a resounding message against Mr. Daniels’ exaggerated claims and conduct of his lawsuit."
Sports Collectors Daily
http://
So proving shilling is almost impossible. On ebay, it's another story.
Check out R&R Auctions.
My eBay Store
BigCrumbs! I made over $250 last year!
<< <i>
I hope you have proof when someone lets Mastro know
>>
Yep and you are just the guy to do it !
<< <i>Monday, 16 July 2007
Four months after a lawsuit was filed, an Indiana judge rules in the case of Daniels vs Mastro Auctions.
Mastro Auctions did not intend to defraud former customer Bill Daniels when the Indiana dealer purchased a lot of autographs in a 2004 auction.
Boone County, Indiana Superior Court Judge Matthew Kincaid made the 46-page ruling last week, several months after Daniels filed suit over a lot of 2,000 signatures, some of which he claimed weremisrepresented. Daniels claimed 123 photos in the gropu were not in color or of the 8x10 size as was claimed in the catalog description. He claimed others were smudged and perhaps not authentic.
Kincaid ruled the two autograph authenticators offered as prosecution witnesses "possess sufficient skill, knowledge or experience in the fields in which they were asked to render opinions."
The auction company had offered to replace some of the photos but the offer was refused and Daniels filed the lawsuit. Mastro was ordered to pay Daniels $9,000--nearly half of the purchase price, but the dealer was also ordered to pay for $1,000 "defamatory" statements he made and $2,000 for failing to produce documents the court had asked for.
In an e-mail sent to customers Sunday, Mastro Auctions President Doug Allen wrote: "Overall, Mastro Auctions is very happy with this result. Although it is unfortunate that this dispute had to go all the way to trial, we are pleased that the judge sent what we believe to be a resounding message against Mr. Daniels’ exaggerated claims and conduct of his lawsuit."
Sports Collectors Daily
http:// >>
Wow, this is from a slightly different POV than the letter that Mastro sent out.
My Auctions