Whatever happened to the lawsuit and ACG?

Bikingnut · November 25, 2005 9:43AM

Haven't heard anything in quite a while. Anyone know what's going on with it?

mrearlygold · November 25, 2005 10:00AM

I'm glad I'm out of it.

flaminio · November 25, 2005 10:07AM

<< Haven't heard anything in quite a while. Anyone know what's going on with it? >>

The Federal case was dismissed, on the grounds that ACG are buttheads. As far as I know, the Florida case is technically still pending, but with just about all defendents dropped it's pretty much dead in the water.

ccex · November 25, 2005 10:11AM

I'm glad I'm out of it too. (I was named as a defendant in the first version of the suit filed from Florida in the spring of 2004, along with 45 others). It seems the Hagers' lawyers pointed them to deeper pockets - such as the ANA, and PCGS -- and urged them to make this a federal case, invoking the Sherman antitrust act. It was thrown out of federal court several months ago. An amended version of the suit may still be on the books in Florida, but I don't expect it will amount to much. I haven't bothered to check as to its status since former forum member K6AZ took his anti-ACG website down.

Craton · November 25, 2005 10:11AM

<< I'm glad I'm out of it. >>

ditto!

DickyBetz · November 25, 2005 10:13AM

What was it? Anybody have any links to anything that will tell me what it was all about?

Craton · November 25, 2005 10:14AM

<< What was it? Anybody have any links to anything that will tell me what it was all about? >>

use a search engine

questor54 · November 25, 2005 10:17AM

<< 

<< Haven't heard anything in quite a while. Anyone know what's going on with it? >>

The Federal case was dismissed, on the grounds that ACG are buttheads. As far as I know, the Florida case is technically still pending, but with just about all defendents dropped it's pretty much dead in the water. >>

Ah yes! The butthead theory of jurisprudence. I just wish there was such a thing, the court system would work a LOT more smoothly!

DickyBetz · November 25, 2005 10:24AM

Jason, I found an article about it from the July 2004 issue of the Numismatist. I find it appalling what ACG did to you and everyone else in the lawsuit. Did they really sue you because you spoke the truth about them on these message boards?

nwcs · November 25, 2005 10:34AM

I remember something about a fishwife, but I may be utterly mistaken.

Craton · November 25, 2005 10:56AM

DickyBetz · November 25, 2005 11:05AM

Craton · November 25, 2005 11:17AM

Doh!

UncleWiggly · November 25, 2005 11:20AM

DickyBetz · November 25, 2005 11:24AM

nwcs · November 25, 2005 11:27AM

True, the safest thing to say may be: I do not believe ACG grades and certifies coins comparably to PCGS/NGC/ANACS and thus I do not believe a coin in their holder is worth what the assigned grade may lead one to believe and one should exercise due diligence with any coin in their holder.

DickyBetz · November 25, 2005 11:29AM

<< True, the safest thing to say may be: I do not believe ACG grades and certifies coins comparably to PCGS/NGC/ANACS and thus I do not believe a coin in their holder is worth what the assigned grade may lead one to believe and one should exercise due diligence with any coin in their holder. >>

mrearlygold · November 25, 2005 11:36AM

Bear · November 25, 2005 11:41AM

Lawsuites are always a nightmare and very expensive.

I hope it is all settled for everyone.

Craton · November 25, 2005 11:42AM

Hey Dicky!!!

nwcs · November 25, 2005 11:44AM

Well, one lesson I think many of us learned is to be careful with our invective. It may be fun, but definitely not immune from trouble. A careful statement of opinion usually does the trick.

ldhair · November 25, 2005 11:46AM

It's a good thing that this entire deal went quite.
It cost a lot of people some bucks and a lot of worry.

<< True, the safest thing to say may be: I do not believe ACG grades and certifies coins comparably to PCGS/NGC/ANACS and thus I do not believe a coin in their holder is worth what the assigned grade may lead one to believe and one should exercise due diligence with any coin in their holder. >>

Some very wise words.

boston · November 25, 2005 12:15PM

Didn't they start grading Canadian coins?

Seems there was thread or link here awhile back where they were advertising to the Canadian market.

Bob

WorldTypeSet · November 25, 2005 1:19PM

ACG's venture into the Canadian Market appears to be short lived. There was some material that appeared (I won't comment on the quality), but it seems to have mostly gone away.

ksteelheader · November 25, 2005 5:35PM

<< ACG's venture into the Canadian Market appears to be short lived. There was some material that appeared (I won't comment on the quality), but it seems to have mostly gone away. >>

They have loads of Canadian stuff!

1960NYGiants · November 26, 2005 3:23AM

<< 

<< ACG's venture into the Canadian Market appears to be short lived. There was some material that appeared (I won't comment on the quality), but it seems to have mostly gone away. >>

They have loads of Canadian stuff! >>

They setup at most of the major Canadian shows. And advertise in Canadian Coin News and the CNA Journal. Most of the stuff they list on the Bay are not in ACG holders. Maybe they're fading away?

Gene

mrearlygold · November 26, 2005 5:25AM

docday2003 · November 29, 2005 2:17PM

I have noticed that AH is selling primarily NGC coins in Canada.

Myqqy · November 29, 2005 2:29PM

I wonder if some or all of the prior defendants feel that something positive for the hobby came out of the deal, so it was ultimately worth it go through all of that worry and hassle?

Barry · November 29, 2005 10:19PM

On advice of counsel, I will not comment about this thread.

Jcarney · November 29, 2005 10:51PM

<< I wonder if some or all of the prior defendants feel that something positive for the hobby came out of the deal, so it was ultimately worth it go through all of that worry and hassle? >>

Actually, no. I don't think the hassle and expense to my family was worth it. What was really accomplished? Possibly, a few people out there know now that all TPGs are not created equal, but basically it's just pissing into the wind. Witness the new predatory TPGs, take note of all the various coin scams on internet auction sites. There will never be a shortage of suckers or people to take advantage of them and I don't have the resourses to save the world. Caveat Emptor.

TwoSides2aCoin · November 29, 2005 11:05PM

how about a class action lawsuit from all of us who bought ACG graded coins.... thinking the grade was fair, only to lose lots of money in the trading arena ????? HUH ? HUH ? HUH ?

These companies and individuals who sue because they HATE the TRUTH being told about them, or because they think they were so wrongly treated (Mr MILLER) really belong in IRAQ as a shield for our troops.

SUE ME ! I'll just claim temporary insanity

...then I'll file for bankruptcy and you can sqeeze water out of a stone

flaminio · November 30, 2005 2:27AM

<< I wonder if some or all of the prior defendants feel that something positive for the hobby came out of the deal, so it was ultimately worth it go through all of that worry and hassle? >>

I agree with jcarney -- it was absolutely not worth it. Many people don't seem to understand that we were playing with real money here, and with our livelihoods. Yes, the case was pretty much a slam-dunk, but there was always the possibility that it could go the other way. And for people not familiar with the situation, it was even less clear. My wife has virtually no knowledge of the coin business, and she was a wreck for the entire time the suit was pending. She had a real fear that we would lose our house, our savings; pretty much everything. Remember, the plaintiffs were talking about getting millions per defendent.

Even if you dismiss those phantom fears, there was still the real cost of the lawyers' expenses. My family did not take vacation in 2004 as a direct consequence of the plaintiffs' actions. Think my daughters understood that? Think they felt that "something positive for the hobby" was worth not going to Disneyland?

It may be a cop-out to say so, but if I had to do it again, I'd've shut up about A Certain Grading company.

IrishMike · November 30, 2005 2:36AM

flaminio, points well made. It's never a good thing to get sued. Neither side usually wins in the long run and the anguish isn't worth it. I certainly don't see any pluses for the defendants in the case we are talking about. You can be 100% correct and have the best of motives and a lawsuit might still appear and as you have stated it's not worth grief.

Bochiman · November 14, 2006 2:10PM

According to the latest CoinWorld, received today, the lawsuit has an "undisclosed" settlement.......

I hope the settlement is that the lawsuit was to be dropped in return for the defendants not filing "you're a dumbass" lawsuit back at them!

Dog97 · November 14, 2006 2:24PM

"Factual" allegations #16 from the fed suit:
<<<JOHN a/k/a dog_xx, Dog97, Dog (ME)’s statement that ACG’s President was arrested in Longwood, Florida for same-sex prostitution;>>>
Bunch of frikin idiots, my name aint John and I never made that statement. I should sue them.

CaptHenway · November 14, 2006 2:55PM

<< According to the latest CoinWorld, received today, the lawsuit has an "undisclosed" settlement.......

I hope the settlement is that the lawsuit was to be dropped in return for the defendants not filing "you're a dumbass" lawsuit back at them! >>

I wonder how much the ANA had to pay them.

Barry · November 14, 2006 9:47PM

I can't believe they settled. And how much of that ANA money came from the fund that was solicited to help the 40 or so collectors initially named in the suit?

Julian · November 15, 2006 12:23AM

The settling of this lawsuit is strictly a matter of dollars and cents and was made by the insurance companies involved.

There was no admission of liability and no winner will be declared.

The named parties, as far as I know, were being represented by insurance companies and their attornies and it was strictly a fiscal decision.

If it was strictly up to the defendants and there were no ongoing costs, I am virtually certain that they would have all wished for this to go to trial.

flaminio · November 15, 2006 12:45AM

<< There was no admission of liability and no winner will be declared. >>

That's a cop-out, IMHO. If the plaintiffs received money via a settlement, then for all intents and purposes they won. I am thoroughly disgusted with this action and will do no further business with the ANA. It's clear from all they've done that they have no interest in the collector in their business.

DennisH · November 15, 2006 1:12AM

I dropped my ANA membership when they accepted a large donation from them and will never renew.

Julian · November 15, 2006 2:18AM

This was an insurance company decision, and in fact, several insurance companies.

The ANA did not lose any money.

I personally feel that Bob and Dennis are short sighted in their view of the ANA.

ANA did not initiate the lawsuit.

If you had been sued, what would you have done?

dbldie55 · November 15, 2006 2:23AM

<< If you had been sued, what would you have done? >>

Are you saying that going bankrupt to try and prove your innocence is not a good move? Maybe some members do not mind some lawyer getting rich on their money.

Jcarney · November 15, 2006 2:25AM

<< And how much of that ANA money came from the fund that was solicited to help the 40 or so collectors initially named in the suit? >>

Money which was never disbursed to any of the named defendants.

410a · November 15, 2006 2:27AM

Bikingnut, page 5, November 20, 2006 Coin World has and
article.............gotta run.

Mark · November 15, 2006 2:29AM

Julian:
I don't know how much influence the ANA could exert with its insurance companies. I also don't know what the ANA thought were its chances of success. But, if the ANA could tell its insurance companies not to settle and if the ANA thought its chances of success were high, then perhaps the ANA should have not settled. Why? The ANA is different from an individual or a business. An individual or a business has only to worry about what is best for him, her, or it. Settling a law suit if it is "cost effective" is then the right thing to do. The ANA, however, is seemingly supposed to represent collectors and worry about what is best for the hobby. If the ANA believed that the suit was without merit and demonstrating this result to the hobby would be sufficently beneficial to collectors, then the ANA should not have settled even if it was "cost effective" to the ANA to settle.

Mark

flaminio · November 15, 2006 2:30AM

<< If you had been sued, what would you have done? >>

I would point out to my dear colleague that I was sued.

Julian · November 15, 2006 3:21AM

ACG cannot claim victory in this, of that I am sure.

Terms of the settlement were not disclosed, but I am virtually certain that none of the defendants lost money, which was the reason for the lawsuit, in the first place.

The ANA could have opted out of the settlement, but then would have had to absorb all of the costs of defense, as well as the one in a trillion chance that the lawsuit would go against them. The membership of the organization would not have endorsed that idea.

Craton · November 15, 2006 3:23AM

<< 

<< And how much of that ANA money came from the fund that was solicited to help the 40 or so collectors initially named in the suit? >>

Money which was never disbursed to any of the named defendants. >>

I know of not ONE person that money was dispersed to. Not even to the "poster boy" in their article for pleads for donations that was published in at least one of the popular coin rags! I'm still bitter..............

flaminio · November 15, 2006 3:28AM

Did only the ANA settle, or did all the other defendents settle as well? Also named in that suit was Heritage, the PNG, CU, and Barry Stuppler. I hope at least one of those named has the cajones to smack Al & Diane into oblivion.

Barry · November 15, 2006 3:28AM

This was an insurance company decision, and in fact, several insurance companies.

Cetainly possible. Many insurance policies give the insurance co. the final right to settle (regardless of the merits of the case) and they will if they feel it will cost them less to settle than to defend. I know when I was shopping for my medical malpractice insurance, I was sure to select a policy that gave me the final right to decide whether to settle. (Fortunately, I haven't had to use it...)

I was surprised by the settlement in this suit figuring the ANA, PNG, and Heritage certainly have much more in the way of financial resources and would have held their ground for that reason. But, you never know...

Whatever happened to the lawsuit and ACG?

Comments

Leave a Comment