Posted By:
warshawlawyou think it might be getting better so you stick your tongue in there again to probe and you find out otherwise.
Kenny Cole: Actually, I'm primarily a real estate and construction guy so the med mal reference goes right over my head. 
In real estate, the rule is that the seller must disclose any material fact which might adversely impact on the value of the property. In my mind, the rather checkered history of the card is a material fact worthy of disclosure because it would tend to adversely impact the decision of a buyer to purchase the card, as it did with Wayne. It is not equivalent to a failure to diagnose because it is a non-disclosure of a known fact rather than a non-detection error.
PSA: Their error in Dan's case was not grading, it was losing the card. I made it clear that I have no comments as to their grading practices as a result of the case; it was not part of the issue. Now, considering their history of grading fakes (Ruth rookie) and altered cards (my card; an OJ with the ad trimmed off was in the November 2002 Lipset auction and offered as an example of a PSA error), I don't happen to like their service itself, but that has nothing to do with Dan's case.
Greg: after reading your post yesterday, I went home and consigned the two altered cards to the trash bin where they sleep today with the fishes. I hope you do the same with the Cobb.