Home U.S. Coin Forum
Options

Breaking News - ACG Federal Antitrust Suit - DISMISSED!

«13

Comments

  • Options
    tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,636 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Awwww - ain't that a shame... image
  • Options
    BladeBlade Posts: 1,744
    Aparently there is some justice in our legal system. The ANA is off the hook. Who were the other 8?
    Tom

    NOTE: No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However, a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

    Type collector since 1981
    Current focus 1855 date type set
  • Options
    dimplesdimples Posts: 1,286 ✭✭✭
    Congratulations Eric! imageimageimage
  • Options
    K6AZK6AZ Posts: 9,295


    << <i>Aparently there is some justice in our legal system. The ANA is off the hook. Who were the other 8? >>



    Tom, the second link in my sig line has the text of the complaint.
  • Options
    ShamikaShamika Posts: 18,785 ✭✭✭✭

    Does this mean we can start speaking our minds concerning ACG without fear of retrobution?

    Buyer and seller of vintage coin boards!
  • Options
    flaminioflaminio Posts: 5,664 ✭✭✭
    YOU SUCK, HAGER!
  • Options
    RYKRYK Posts: 35,801 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Are there any outstanding complaints?
  • Options
    flaminioflaminio Posts: 5,664 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Are there any outstanding complaints? >>

    K6AZ would know more than I, but as far as I know the Florida suit is technically still alive, but the feeding tube has been removed and we're just waiting for it to die. I, and many others, have already been dropped from it, but there are still some folk still on the defendents' list. The death of the Federal suit is of great relief to me, but honestly I always figured that one as a non-starter.
  • Options
    K6AZK6AZ Posts: 9,295
    Bob summed it up pretty well Robert.
  • Options
    pharmerpharmer Posts: 8,355
    Makes me wonder if terrorism was on here to get in a last shot before this broke. And what has come of the newbie who by the most amazing coincidence also uses 3's as E's in his forum ID?

    Congrats, guys.
    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

    Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."

    image
  • Options
    ss350camaross350camaro Posts: 4,529
    Glad to hear of this but, the order does say that it is "Appealable".



    do you think they will ?
  • Options
    K6AZK6AZ Posts: 9,295
    Sure, they can appeal. They won't get anywhere. You just can not sue consumers under Sherman acts for complaining about your product.
  • Options
    ss350camaross350camaro Posts: 4,529


    << <i>Sure, they can appeal. They won't get anywhere. You just can not sue consumers under Sherman acts for complaining about your product. >>



    what if they took a cue from the Memorandum Opinion and revised thier complaint?

    can that be done ?

    (i'm no "legal eagle")


    image
  • Options
    LongacreLongacre Posts: 16,717 ✭✭✭
    All this legal stuff makes me sleepy.
    Always took candy from strangers
    Didn't wanna get me no trade
    Never want to be like papa
    Working for the boss every night and day
    --"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
  • Options
    relayerrelayer Posts: 10,570

    I wonder if Judge Roberts broke out in laugther before he told ruled their suit was a joke image
    image
    My posts viewed image times
    since 8/1/6
  • Options
    K6AZK6AZ Posts: 9,295
    Doug, the judge's decision is very solid legally within the meaning of the Sherman and Clay acts, and I don't see an appeals court overturning it. Without a reversal, tough luck filing another case in any federal court. This is for all intents and purposes over in federal court, unless they want to waste more money to appeal.
  • Options
    airplanenutairplanenut Posts: 22,728 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Hager vs. K6... I can see it at the Supreme Court now imageimage

    Seriously, congrats on this one image 'Bout time!
    JK Coin Photography - eBay Consignments | High Quality Photos | LOW Prices | 20% of Consignment Proceeds Go to Pancreatic Cancer Research
  • Options
    TonekillerTonekiller Posts: 1,308 ✭✭
    Very Cool, congrat's!
  • Options
    robertprrobertpr Posts: 6,862 ✭✭✭
    image

    Congratulations Eric!
  • Options
    ToneloverTonelover Posts: 1,554
    image I guess they better update their homepage.
  • Options
    ERER Posts: 7,345
    So sad.image













































    NOT!
  • Options
    BochimanBochiman Posts: 25,790 ✭✭✭✭✭
    imageimageimageimageimageimageimageimage
    imageimageimageimageimageimageimage
    imageimageimageimageimageimage
    imageimageimageimageimage
    imageimageimageimage
    imageimageimage
    imageimage
    image

    image
    imageimage
    imageimageimage
    imageimageimageimage
    imageimageimageimageimage
    imageimageimageimageimageimage
    imageimageimageimageimageimageimage
    imageimageimageimageimageimageimageimage

    I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment

  • Options
    mgoodm3mgoodm3 Posts: 17,497 ✭✭✭
    image
    coinimaging.com/my photography articles Check out the new macro lens testing section
  • Options
    jharjhar Posts: 1,126
    That's great Eric!! imageimageimage
    J'har
  • Options
    BochimanBochiman Posts: 25,790 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Just want to add.....the hagars are VERY lucky that Judge Roberts was not a numismatist. If he were, they probably would have found themselves in contempt of court right from the start.

    I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment

  • Options
    K6AZK6AZ Posts: 9,295
    Just for the record, I had very little involvement in the federal case. As a matter of fact, I wasn't even a titled defendant. The kudos for this should go to PCGS, ICTA, ANA and Heritage who's attorneys did a great job in dispensing of this nonsense in short order.
  • Options
    paigowjohnnypaigowjohnny Posts: 4,257
    tortious....I love that word
  • Options
    paigowjohnnypaigowjohnny Posts: 4,257
    Poor Alan. image
    Poor Diane. image
  • Options
    RussRuss Posts: 48,514 ✭✭✭
    The only thing more ridiculous than the lawsuits themselves is that they were actually able to find lawyers stupid enough to file them.

    Russ, NCNE
  • Options
    DorkGirlDorkGirl Posts: 9,994 ✭✭✭
    Very good news!! image
    Becky
  • Options
    ziggy29ziggy29 Posts: 18,669 ✭✭✭
    VERY cool news, good for the hobby and the First Amendment.

    Glad to hear that I didn't auction off that cleaned ACG "AU-50" '34-S Peace Dollar for the defense fund in vain! image

    Ding dong, the witch is dead...
  • Options
    Coin FinderCoin Finder Posts: 7,758 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Eric This must be a weight off your shoulders. Great Job in keeping us updated and fighting for the consumer both past and present.

    Thanks

    Tbig
  • Options
    ToneloverTonelover Posts: 1,554
    I like this part:

    The complaint does not allege facts to support an inference of monopoly power. As to this element, the complaint merely states, conclusorily, that the natural and proximate effect of the illicit
    agreement and overt acts of the Defendants . . . was to diminish competition in the coin grading and
    authenticating marketplace by removing . . . [plaintiff’s] market share and allowing . . . [a
    competitor] to increase its market share to the point where it exclusively controls prices in the market.
    (Compl. ¶ 19.) This allegation is actually undermined by the facts alleged. image Plaintiff claims only “an approximate 8 (8%) percent share in the overall relevant market pertaining to rare coin grading and authentication services in the United States.”

    (Compl. ¶ 12.) Shifting eight percent of the market does not necessarily equate to any appreciable change in competition or establish that some other entity achieved monopoly power as a result, and plaintiffs have alleged nothing to support such an inference.
  • Options
    nwcsnwcs Posts: 13,386 ✭✭✭
    HOORAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    image

    image

    image

    image
  • Options
    fivecentsfivecents Posts: 11,207 ✭✭✭✭✭
    imageimageimageimage
  • Options
    TorinoCobra71TorinoCobra71 Posts: 8,102 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Memorandum Opinion

    Order >>




    About time the little guy got some justice!

    TorinoCobra71

    image
  • Options
    TorinoCobra71TorinoCobra71 Posts: 8,102 ✭✭✭
    Tell'em Flaminio...... image


    TorinoCobra71

    image
  • Options
    bgricebgrice Posts: 1,180
    Can the defendants request that ACG reimburse them for their legal expenses? Sounds fair to me.... bring a frivilous lawsuit in front of the court and you pay out your snazola(to the court & defendents) if it is dismissed. Might stop a lot of crap.
  • Options
    nwcsnwcs Posts: 13,386 ✭✭✭
    I do have to ask, given the history of the issue, where those people are who said Eric was wrong in saying that the federal case would be dismissed.
  • Options
    ss350camaross350camaro Posts: 4,529


    << <i>I like this part:

    The complaint does not allege facts to support an inference of monopoly power. As to this element, the complaint merely states, conclusorily, that the natural and proximate effect of the illicit
    agreement and overt acts of the Defendants . . . was to diminish competition in the coin grading and
    authenticating marketplace by removing . . . [plaintiff’s] market share and allowing . . . [a
    competitor] to increase its market share to the point where it exclusively controls prices in the market.
    (Compl. ¶ 19.) This allegation is actually undermined by the facts alleged. image Plaintiff claims only “an approximate 8 (8%) percent share in the overall relevant market pertaining to rare coin grading and authentication services in the United States.”

    (Compl. ¶ 12.) Shifting eight percent of the market does not necessarily equate to any appreciable change in competition or establish that some other entity achieved monopoly power as a result, and plaintiffs have alleged nothing to support such an inference. >>




    Yes, This was quite a slap down for them image

  • Options
    CameonutCameonut Posts: 7,433 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Eric
    That is just outstanding news. The correct decision was reached.

    I wonder if this means that we will continue to see mass sales on Ebay from AH Collectibles? They will need to pay off their legal team!

    “In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." - Thomas Jefferson

    My digital cameo album 1950-64 Cameos - take a look!

  • Options
    ScarsdaleCoinScarsdaleCoin Posts: 5,440 ✭✭✭✭✭
    HERO OF THE DAY...........



    Judge Roberts was appointed to the U.S. District Court in July 1998. He graduated cum laude fromVassar College (1974) and received an M.I.A. from the School for International Training (1978) and a J.D. from Columbia University (1978). Prior to his appointment to the bench, Judge Roberts served for three years as Chief of the Criminal Section in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. Previously, Judge Roberts was the Principal Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. In prior posts, Judge Roberts served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, an associate with Covington & Burling, and a trial attorney in the Criminal Section in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice.
    image
    Jon Lerner - Scarsdale Coin - www.CoinHelp.com
  • Options
    flaminioflaminio Posts: 5,664 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Tell'em Flaminio...... image >>

    image
  • Options
    nwcsnwcs Posts: 13,386 ✭✭✭
    Actually there were quite a few slams to ACG in the decision.
  • Options
    tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,636 ✭✭✭✭✭
    asaacg posted on the Yahoo CLCT chatroom about this lawsuit .... do ya think they'll give an update to the status? image

    FACT-An Antitrust complaint was filed against CLCT/PCGS on 12/17/2004 in the U.S.District Court, District of Columbia,Case No.1:04cv02213
    Judge R.W.Roberts.
    FACT-CLCT/PCGS was served on 01/18/2005.
    FACT-Thomas Wiesel Partners LLC
    One Montgomery Street
    Suite 3700
    San Francisco, CA 94104
    was notified as to this Antitrust Complaint on 2/18/2005 via U.S. Express Mail.
    FACT-A representative of the Firm confirmed receipt of this information on 2/22/2005.
    The FACTS are that CLCT and their Underwriters were well aware of THIS Lawsuit prior to the OFFERING. The question is,was it disclosed to their INVESTORS? For more info check out http://www.asa-accugrade.com and click on these topics, CLCT EXAMINED and ANTITRUST LAWSUIT.
  • Options
    mrearlygoldmrearlygold Posts: 17,858 ✭✭✭
  • Options
    BarryBarry Posts: 10,100 ✭✭✭
    Congrats to all involved!
  • Options
    CarlWohlforthCarlWohlforth Posts: 11,074
    Well that was a total waste of time, money and energy. Thank goodness the suit is dismissed.
  • Options
    stev32kstev32k Posts: 2,098 ✭✭✭
    << The only thing more ridiculous than the lawsuits themselves is that they were actually able to find lawyers stupid enough to file them.>>

    You got to remember that lawyers get paid by the hour. A lot of them don't really care if the suit has merit or not as long as they get their hourly fee.
    Who is General Failure, and why is he reading my hard drive?

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file