Shanus v. R.L. Americana, Lifson, Robert Edwards Auctions, et al.
 

My apologies if this has already been discussed, posted, etc. But I came this on a blog I regularly visit.

"Before the Court is Defendants Robert Lifson and Robert Edward Auctions' (collectively "REA") motion to seal and redact portions of the trial transcript and exhibits. REA argues that they have a strong interest in redacting and sealing portions of the transcript because they reference confidential business dealings, contracts, and settlements relating to customers who were not parties to this action.

After a five day trial, the jury found that REA, with the assistance of nonparties Peter Nash and his business, Cooperstown Monument Company ("Cooperstown"), fraudulently manipulated the market through a deceptive bidding and purchase scheme. Plaintiff Corey R. Shanus contends that this motion is nothing more than an attempt to conceal evidence of REA's fraud from the public…."

Interesting to say the least. And the motion was denied.

https://reason.com/2019/08/29/no-sea...-a-civil-case/

Nothing is surprising anymore!

Wow! This could be interesting.

You guys are so all negative. Hobby used to be fun. Makes me sick to my stomach.

I only buy raw cards from itinerant street peddlers, so none of this third party grading or auction house stuff means anything to me.

Is this the reason why the FBI named Lifson as a shill in a previous case?Isnt Rob Lifson suppose to be the "squeegee-clean" hobby guy?

In case you are too busy to scroll cursor over and click the link, here is a portion of the blog post...feel free to read the whole thing by clicking the link.

Brian


For example, REA wishes to seal sections of the April 30th and May 1st transcripts that describe Mr. Lifson's relationship with Mr. Nash and outline their scheme. The disputed transcripts explain how Mr. Nash consigned items that he owned for sale in REA auctions. After placing his items in the auctions, Mr. Nash bid on some of those very same items as Cooperstown, an entity that he completely controlled.

Mr. Nash then extended credit to Cooperstown for the cost of the successful bids, therefore preventing any money from actually changing hands between Mr. Nash and Cooperstown. Essentially, Mr. Nash would loan Cooperstown, an entity under his control, money to pay himself for Cooperstown's purchases of his own memorabilia.

Mr. Lifson, as the auction representative, would normally receive a buyer's commission and fees from items sold in REA auctions. However, Mr. Nash would not pay the full fees, accruing debt with REA. Instead, Mr. Lifson had an agreement with Mr. Nash that the items Cooperstown purchased would be held as collateral for Mr. Nash's debt, but it is unclear whether Mr. Lifson ever intended on collecting this debt.

Mr. Lifson would then report these sales on his website, but REA never actually removed these items from their inventory, until offering them for sale at some point in the future. Because successful sales potentially increase the value of items, Mr. Lifson and Mr. Nash's scheme would artificially inflate the prices of items that they intended to sell in future auctions.

For the above reasons, the materials that REA seeks to seal are directly relevant to the heart of this case, meaning that the basis for the judgment rests upon the disputed transcripts and exhibits. If the Court sealed the disputed materials, it would essentially conceal the very mechanism that REA used to perpetuate the scheme, leaving the public with little more than the judgment itself to establish the existence of the scheme. Consequently, the Court finds that the public interest in disclosure outweighs any private interest to seal….

Imagine if this was about Ken Goldin. Sheesh. This would likely be post 1,450.

Squeaky clean baseball card dealer?

The hobby is oxymoronic.

Check out my listings on BST.:D

If you google different combinations of the individuals involved seems like a lot of this goes back over 10 years.

with memes and gifs

This is old news. The case as I understand it was settled by Rob and Corey quite some time ago, perhaps a year or more.

This legal snipet is extremely incomplete. All commissions were collected by REA relating to the sales in question - it just took a long time. It is true that considerable legal action was necessary to collect all funds due by Nash and this Cooperstown Monument company (i am still due significant legal fees which were awarded to me). If we had no interest in collecting all funds due, I certainly would not have pursued collection. That said, in the end when Corey and I finally sat down to talk we quickly realized that we were on the same page on virtually everything and had no business being in a legal battle and continuing with appeals and legal nonsense was a waste of time and money. When we finally sat down we easily settled our matter - extremely amicably I might add - and have actually been on friendlier terms since than ever. In fact I’ve been able to help him with some pretty significant deals over the past year. With reference to Mastro Auctions, I was not a shill bidder! My role was to bring information about the issues of the company to the attention of the FBI and convince them this warranted looking at. If not for me, for better or worse, that business and their way of illegally operating would have probably continued to this day. I am literally moving today (sitting behind a truck as I type) and really have no desire to address every inaccuracy that is possible - I am retired and very much enjoying myself and family - but as many on this board know, i am always available to help collectors with feedback and information about collecting when possible.

Sincerely,

Robert Lifson

Robertelifson@gmail.com

Peter is correct. Rob and I settled this case over a year ago, and as Rob says, we have since been on amicable terms, and over that time Rob has helped me add some significant items to my collection.

Rob and Corey are two of the most knowledgeable guys in the hobby, and both have been of great help to me over the years. I trust both completely and am glad that they are on friendly terms again.

+1.... As a friend of both men for many decades, its very refreshing to see things work out

Nice to See
 

Nice to see Rob and Corey respond to this thread in a quick and frank manner. This is indeed an old case that I am familiar with but I was never certain what happened with it in terms of resolution. And whatever happened to that (bogus) trophy Nash turned over to REA for auctioning? Does anyone know where it sits today?!??
Anyway, this thread raised my eyebrows because earlier this month (at the National) I turned over my very nice 1968 Topps set to REA's Dean Faragi to auction off in the upcoming November auction. This will be my first time going through REA.
"Oh no," I said to myself when I saw this thread, "Enough. I'm tired of auction house hijinks."
You see, for the past couple of years I had been using PWCC to auction off pieces of my card collection. But after its latest troubles broke I decided it was time to look elsewhere. I remembered that Mike Gidwitz (a hobby veteran and true gentleman), who has known Rob for decades, told me at a dinner I had with him a few years ago here in Chicago that he swears by REA in terms of integrity. So I'm sticking with REA. I've expressed my integrity concerns to Dean directly. I looked him in the eye at the National and said, "Please, whatever my 1968 set goes for, so be it. Just auction it off with integrity."
The only question you have to ask in this Shanus case is: How did Rob Lifson, a smart guy and industry veteran, get duped by Peter Nash? I'm working on a book about Mastro (slowly!) and when I interviewed Rob and posed this specific question to him a few years ago he came across as honest when he told me that at the time Nash seemed to be a knowledgeable collector wanting to do business with him. In essence, he admitted he got duped. It happens to all of us. Having already talked to industry veterans about Lifson/Mastro as part of my book research, I understand that not everyone is a fan of Rob (I get versions of the old question: "What did he know and when did he know it?" while working with Mastro) but as far as REA is concerned, I have been reassured by Rob's frankness in response to this particular thread. Again, I'm sticking with 'em. Thank you.

Also people should remember Rob's not involved with the day-to-day at REA anymore. Brian Dwyer (Spacktrack here) is President, and unless he's got me completely fooled he's one of the most honest guys I've met.

What, there isn't going to be a fight in the school parking lot? Darn, another thread about to bite the dust. Can't you guys add just a little entertainment value to this thread by calling each other at least one name? :p

People keep making the mistake of attacking the wrong AH. Never learn. Trouble makers. Stick to PWCC, Goldin, Hunt, Probstein, etc if you are going to say something negative. Will be received much better.

Maybe I’m confused, but what is incomplete about this sentence and why are we to give kudos to Rob? For letting Nash shill bid and artificially inflate the price on the market. What flavor of kool aid is this????

“Mr. Lifson would then report these sales on his website, but REA never actually removed these items from their inventory, until offering them for sale at some point in the future. Because successful sales potentially increase the value of items, Mr. Lifson and Mr. Nash's scheme would artificially inflate the prices of items that they intended to sell in future auctions.”

This was a court finding, is it not?

I like how the OP doesn’t have their name listed either. Grow a set of nuts

Who were the main parties involved in the suit? If they aint slinging mud at each other then half the train wreck will be missing from the thread .

To the point, not sure what actually occurred and why it seems to have been settled and what brought the settlement (besides the obvious amicable terms for the parties involved).

If there was shill bidding knowingly going on, then that would not be a cool thing.