But would he need to be awarded damages if he's awarded possession of the ball? I just don't see how Goldin, who doesn't own the ball in any way, can decide unilaterally that it will sell a ball whose ownership is in question. How can the consignment agreement stand if the consignor is said not to own the ball?

If I put myself in the position of the 18 year old fighting for ownership, if I'm awarded the ball and am declared the ball's rightful owner because it was stolen from me, I don't know what it would take to rectify things with me from Goldin. Money wouldn't be the issue. It would feel like the ball was stolen from me twice and I never had any agency in a situation where I own something.

The next step in the case is a preliminary injunction hearing. The judge probably won't decide who owns the ball, just whether the kid has demonstrated enough likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm to stop the auction. I assume as to irreparable harm he will make the argument you articulate, that the ball is unique and at the end of the day, if he wins, money damages won't make him whole. I haven't researched Florida law on remedies so this is just off general principles.

Entirely out of curiosity, and knowing the answer might not be out there.

How do lawyers take these cases? Paid? or contingency?

Seems like it's very iffy all around.

And of course, it's only worth much of anything as a milestone ball. The 12th hr by a guy likely to end up with 12 in his career isn't any big deal except to the person that catches it.

I assume Matus' lawyer is on contingency. What's iffy about it?

The reminded me of something like this I saw a few years back. Like most people would, I find an adult strong-arming a kid out of a ball beyond repugnant. I'm not a lawyer, but I think such an act would constitute battery. I was at a game in Baltimore sitting near first base, when this happened. Onlookers cussed the guy out but he didn't care. This was basically a mugging. The first base umpire, having caught the episode out of the corner of his eye, came over after the inning ended and handed a ball to the kid.

It restored my faith in umpires. Well sorta.

Ok, I guess I'm going to be the one a*@hole to say this.

18 year-olds were drafted to go to Vietnam and I have a cousin who signed up for the Marines and was sent to Afghanistan at that age.

18 year-olds are playing Division 1 College Sports all over this country, and many are competing on a high level.

I've run into plenty of 18 year olds I would not want to get into a fist fight with because I would most assuredly lose.

Not sure if the guy doing the strong-arming for the lottery ticket randomly thrown into the crowd was supposed to check birth certificates before diving under bleacher seats for a ball.

I to have seen adults act like an ass at Minor League games chasing a worthless ball, although most will just turn around and hand it to the nearest kid anyways.

You can bet though, if that ball had a bank account number on it, which unlocked a key to a 7 figure payday, those adults wouldn't be so quick to hand the ball over to the nearest doe eyed kid they could find.

Maybe I was the only one thinking this throughout the course of this thread...or I'm the only one to admit it. :D:D

I don't know how much age factors into other people's opinions on this behavior, but I tend to think if you have to rip something out of someone's hand to take possession of it, you didn't catch the baseball.

I'm gonna have to kinda agree with this. None of the videos I saw showed that the 18 year old ever even had a hand on the ball. For all we know the guy who ended up with the ball had it the whole time. People are acting like he straight up stole it from a 9 year old. To call this battery seems extreme, but if there is a video I'm missing please post it

Right but not really the point. The issue is whether the kid had possession or not. If he did, their ages, physiques, personality traits, etc. are irrelevant to his claim of ownership. That said, given the nature of a scrum for a loose ball, I'm not sure a split second grab is enough.

The complaint does contain a count for battery, related to trapping the kid's arm.

I once caught the drumstick at a George Thorogood and the Destroyers concert and was in basically the same sort of scrum. I just went down and covered up like I had a fumble recovery and came away with the stick when the dust settled. I think I threw it away later, so there's that. Far more fun was being at the foot of the stage at the end of the show and getting to shake hands with the band.

The court will sort it out, but if it emerges that the guy pinned down the other guy's arm and pried the ball out of his hand, well, where I was born, we called that "getting mugged." I give the 18 y.o. credit for self-restraint. I know me at 18 would probably have ended up in cuffs for assault; I did once get into a fight in the street with a would-be mugger. 92nd Street between West End and Riverside in NYC. I was a kid. I got so mad when the bigger kid who was mugging me insisted that I turn out my pockets that I threw punches instead. I got the worst of it in the end, but I kept my money. Today, the old fart me would have been too busy ducking to avoid getting hit by the ball and the pouncing people to even get into the scrum. Young me, not so much.

How long will it be until two or three guys square up and really punch it out over a ball?

And while I am spewing random thoughts on this, a reason why 50 is better than 55 may be round number bias. It's the 50/50 club, not the 55/56 club.

I don't know. I watched the videos, but I didn't see ANYBODY "catch" a baseball.

Either two men come out of that scrum, one hand firmly planted on each side of the baseball, singing kumbaya, and pledging to split the proceeds of the windfall, while setting 10% aside to start a non-profit cat rescue...or one of them "rips" it out of the others hand, and claims singular ownership of the ball. Don't see how else that plays out.

Now, that said, my feeling is, they'll have to sell, and split the proceeds (with their lawyers) when it comes down to it.

The other guy who filed suit, is out of luck unless video surfaces that shows exactly what he claims happened, actually happened.

I agree. I think the most likely outcome is split ownership and split proceeds.

The NFL says a man who goes down in possession of the ball is in possession of the ball regardless of who stands up with it.

Assuming they can actually tell who's in possession of it. Many a football has changed "ownership" at the bottom of a pile.

Yeah, a scrum like that is no place for old men. In the end, unless this kid really wants the ball not the money, there's more than enough here that it would be rational to split it. The new claimant, the one smiling and high fiving Belanski at the end, fuck him.

Second fan files lawsuit claiming ownership of Shohei Ohtani’s 50-50 baseball
https://apnews.com/article/shohei-oh...8d7efb87319ad0

Seems like with three individuals all claiming ownership of the baseball and no clear way to determine who actually possessed it first, the judge should ask for the ball to be tendered to the bailiff whereupon it will be cut into three equal pieces and 1/3rd distributed to each plaintiff. Or, better yet, have the bailiff throw the three pieces on the ground and they can reenact the wrestling match.

As an aside, I must be getting old, because watching the video of the kid with one hand uselessly gripping his phone while a $4 million ball is supposedly in his other hand is beyond stupid. Did you learn nothing in little league? When fielding a ball, ALWAYS use two hands! In addition, if I was 18 and a grown man was at my waste trying to wrestle my ball away, my "free" elbow is plowing into his nose. I can't think the medical bills plus pain and suffering would be more than the value of the ball, even if my defense of property and self failed in court.

When is the last time you saw an 18 year old put down a device?

I think any historic ball, puck, etc ... like this should go back to the player to be auctioned off with the proceeds going to the charity of his/her choice and it would avoid all of this nonsense.

In the second video in Peters original post it clearly shows that although the 18 year old was the first person to run towards the ball the ball rolled away from him. You can see it rolling off the table diagonally towards the lower left hand corner in the video.

IMO, the video proves nothing.

New article with some expert opinions:

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/...es-dodgers-mlb

I just strikes me as something that's more of a 50/50 thing. Not sure where the line gets drawn between contingency and "I need $X up front"

Entirely up to the lawyer and client how the lawyer gets paid. Contingency fees can make sense for both parties in a lot of cases.

im guessing if original posessor of this ball agreed to terms with the dodgers and made a trade...these 2 other claimants would've never come forward...additionally...if original posessor of the ball didn't bring it to market so soon with such a high price tag...these 2 claimants would've never come forward.

Truth! It's all about the money. So it's ultimately the fans/collectors/people who are willing to pay the nosebleed prices for such memorabilia who are to "blame" for these legal brouhahas. Plus the lawyers of course.

And no, I won't be among the bidders in any auction for this ball.

:(

By agreement, the preliminary injunction hearing is canceled, and the auction will continue. I infer that means the proceeds will be kept in escrow and barring a settlement, the court will later conduct a trial to determine entitlement. So much for any romantic notion the kid really wanted the ball, I guess.

Wow. How lame is that.

Once it sells for some absurd amount, I bet these guys reach an allocation rather than rolling the dice.

2.1 million current bid, ends tonight.

Don't forget the 22% BP so it's really at $2,562,000

LOL, the 50/50 ball. Does anyone think that the odds are at least 50/50 that the buyer will be able to recover his or her money in the future if they decide to sell? I sure don’t. In my mind this is just another “more dollars than sense” purchase.

Does not seem like a good investment but not sure we can ignore that someone for Ohtani might be bidding on his behalf.

If I hit the home run I don't feel like I would need the ball and certainly not to the tune of a few million bucks.

Or his interpreter might be bidding with his money but without his knowledge.

I tried to find a picture of Kevin Spacey's character from Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil bidding in an auction from jail to complete the image, but alas, no luck.

Maybe he does not need it but wants it. He can more than afford it however he does not strike me as a player with an ego...not that wanting your HR ball necessarily means you have an ego.

3.6 million pre vig and still going.

That's where it ended so $4,392,000 total. Over $1 million more than the McGwire 70th home run ball originally sold for.

Don’t forget the $32,419 in shipping… ouch!!!

Whoever bought this will luckily for his sake be dead when his heirs resell it for a fraction of the price. I wouldn’t want to see that either.

Tulips or Ohtani ball, Tulips or Ohtani ball? I can't figure out which I would choose.

Couldn’t the ball have been bought a couple weeks ago for $2.5 million?

No, it was $4.5 million so the buyer saved a little over $100,000. Good deal.

https://sports.yahoo.com/shohei-ohta...190545705.html

I think the $4.5 million was pre-vig too, so they saved a million.

Why does everything have to be an investment? Why can't we buy things because we enjoy them and want to have them?

People investing in sports cards/memorabilia expecting a return on their investment greater than they could get with other, more profitable investments are the ones with more dollars than sense. People buying sports cards for the love of it are the ones who get it.

And frankly, I'm not too worried about the financial well-being of someone who can spend millions on a baseball. And neither is that person.

Some rich person bought it, and it will be a signal the the masses to buy more sports memorabilia at inflated prices akin to an investment to one day sell your item for 4.5 million.

Presumably there's more than enough money now for the claimants in the lawsuit to reach an allocation.

Keo Goldin made this announcement on Twitter a couple of days ago:

"The Winner of the Most Valuable Baseball of All-Time, the Shohei Ohtani 50th Home Run Ball, is a Corporation in Taiwan. They love Baseball and Shohei Ohtani."

He also said the buyer's identity will be revealed after the World Series.

Source

Funny...TSMC stock took a bit of a bump after that was announced. Does Ohtani also include "influencing the stock market", among his many skills? Already paid for that ball many times over.

:eek:

:D

As a game used collector, I can't stand stickers being placed on game used items. Annoys the heck out of me every time I see it!

LOL, isn’t there a restriction on national treasure’s leaving the country?