Posted By:
Steve Murray"Dear Customer:
As a firm, we have always preferred to handle disputes with professionalism and discretion, even in the infrequent occasion that it is necessary to resolve them in court. Recently, we had what became a very public dispute with a former customer, autograph dealer Bill Daniels. Due to the public nature of this dispute, a number of you have asked about the legitimacy of his claims. Last week, the Honorable Matthew C. Kincaid from the Boone (Indiana) Superior Court issued a 46-page ruling. We thought it appropriate to communicate his findings, and resolution of this dispute, to our customers. Following is a synopsis of the judgment that the Court issued.
The Court found that Daniels’ statements that Mastro Auctions defrauded him, and conspired with PSA/DNA to do so, were defamatory. The Court also found that Daniels “affirmatively sought republication of defamatory statements in national media outlets such as Barron’s and New York Daily News.” In particular, the Court characterized Daniels’ conduct as “picayune, foolish, errant, resultant from a lack of understanding of his rights to publicly declare his complaints outside of a judicial proceeding and overzealous.” As a result, the court held Daniels liable for damages to Mastro Auctions’ reputation in the amount of $1,000.
The Court found that the proposed experts Daniels produced at trial – Richard Simon and Stephen Koschal (whom Daniels had testify that Mastro Auctions sold him forgeries) – were not qualified to render expert opinions. In particular, the Court found that Simon had undergone a “wholesale demolition in his deposition” and that Koschal was “not qualified to render an opinion on anything having to do with autographs.” Simon and Koschal were offered as witnesses after five other proposed experts “all refused to testify on [Daniels’] behalf.”
The Court sanctioned Daniels for his conduct of the litigation during discovery, specifically citing Daniels’ failure to disclose relevant documents timely and to “represent his claimed harm accurately.” As a result, Daniels was fined $2,000.
The Court found that Daniels presented “no evidence” of fraud and that Daniels’ claims that Mastro Auctions defrauded him—and conspired with PSA/DNA to do so--were “false.” The Court entered judgment against Daniels on those claims and awarded no damages.
Daniels was given $608.85 because a small portion of the 2,012 photos Daniels purchased in December 2004 were not as described in the lot description. Mastro Auctions offered to replace those photos shortly after the auction, but Daniels refused.
The only negative of the judgment was that an additional award to Daniels was made on the basis that our catalog stated “LOA from James Spence & Steve Grad / PSA DNA,” but Steve Grad was the only one to physically sign the LOA on behalf of the PSA/DNA team. Our attorneys will ask the judge to reconsider that portion of the ruling.
Overall, Mastro Auctions is very happy with this result. Although it is unfortunate that this dispute had to go all the way to trial, we are pleased that the judge sent what we believe to be a resounding message against Mr. Daniels’ exaggerated claims and conduct of his lawsuit.
Sincerely,
Doug Allen
President
Mastro Auctions"