OT- Crazy Baseball Card Lawsuit

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I cannot imagine what the cause of action is.

Easy. The cause of action is deceit/false representation. Carmona/Hernandez: 1) falsely represented his age; 2) he did so knowing the representation was false when made; 3) the Plaintiff relied on the false representation in purchasing his cards (I have some trouble with the concept that a ballplayer's misrepresentation regarding his age is actually an inducement to others to speculate on his rookie card, but will give the Plaintiff the benefit of the doubt for purposes of this discussion); and 4) the Plaintiff was damaged. Arguably, he's got all but one of the elements of a misrepresentation claim covered.

The real problem is with that pesky other element, the one not mentioned above, which is that Carmona made his misrepresentation with the intent that it would be acted upon by the Plaintiff. Since I don't see how that could possibly be proven by the Plaintiff, I don't see how Plaintiff can show a prima facie case.

[Peter_Spaeth]

What I meant was, I can't imagine what the VIABLE cause of action is.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

Easy. The cause of action is deceit/false representation. Carmona/Hernandez: 1) falsely represented his age; 2) he did so knowing the representation was false when made; 3) the Plaintiff relied on the false representation in purchasing his cards (I have some trouble with the concept that a ballplayer's misrepresentation regarding his age is actually an inducement to others to speculate on his rookie card, but will give the Plaintiff the benefit of the doubt for purposes of this discussion); and 4) the Plaintiff was damaged. Arguably, he's got all but one of the elements of a misrepresentation claim covered.

The real problem is with that pesky other element, the one not mentioned above, which is that Carmona made his misrepresentation with the intent that it would be acted upon by the Plaintiff. Since I don't see how that could possibly be proven by the Plaintiff, I don't see how Plaintiff can show a prima facie case.

If anybody has a case against Carmona, it's the Cleveland Indians.....and they already took their pound of flesh, from what I understand.

[steve B]

I wonder if this is the reason behind the fine print on the Topps wrappers? It says something like - "Topps can't guarantee that the enclosed cards will be worth anything." I can get one out and get the exact wording if anyone's curious.

Did he go after Topps first then the player?

Steve B

[rdwyer]

I spilled hot coffee on my leg reading this. Do I have a case?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by rdwyer

I spilled hot coffee on my leg reading this. Do I have a case?

Of course.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck...;s_Restaurants

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

Easy. The cause of action is deceit/false representation. Carmona/Hernandez: 1) falsely represented his age; 2) he did so knowing the representation was false when made; 3) the Plaintiff relied on the false representation in purchasing his cards (I have some trouble with the concept that a ballplayer's misrepresentation regarding his age is actually an inducement to others to speculate on his rookie card, but will give the Plaintiff the benefit of the doubt for purposes of this discussion); and 4) the Plaintiff was damaged. Arguably, he's got all but one of the elements of a misrepresentation claim covered.

The real problem is with that pesky other element, the one not mentioned above, which is that Carmona made his misrepresentation with the intent that it would be acted upon by the Plaintiff. Since I don't see how that could possibly be proven by the Plaintiff, I don't see how Plaintiff can show a prima facie case.

Good analysis.

I believe a major problem is proof of damages. Does the phony name hurt the autographs value or possibly increase their value due to the recent scandal? Did the plaintiff test the market before and after the scandal? Does the plaintiff have an expert to bolster his case by saying what these cards would have sold for if the player was 3 years younger? Can the plaintiff prove that the autographs really came from the player? There's probably a myriad of other defenses for damages if one thinks about it long enough.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The suit is absurd because the representation was not made TO the plaintiff, or otherwise intended to deceive the plaintiff, as Kenny pointed out.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

Easy. The cause of action is deceit/false representation. Carmona/Hernandez: 1) falsely represented his age; 2) he did so knowing the representation was false when made; 3) the Plaintiff relied on the false representation in purchasing his cards (I have some trouble with the concept that a ballplayer's misrepresentation regarding his age is actually an inducement to others to speculate on his rookie card, but will give the Plaintiff the benefit of the doubt for purposes of this discussion); and 4) the Plaintiff was damaged. Arguably, he's got all but one of the elements of a misrepresentation claim covered.

The real problem is with that pesky other element, the one not mentioned above, which is that Carmona made his misrepresentation with the intent that it would be acted upon by the Plaintiff. Since I don't see how that could possibly be proven by the Plaintiff, I don't see how Plaintiff can show a prima facie case.

I was thinking the same thing!!

[D. Bergin]

Unless Fausto Carmona sold the guy the baseball cards personally, there should be no issue...............period, regardless of the legalese involved.

[teetwoohsix]

Wow. I didn't know in Ohio all you can sue for in small claims court was $3,000.00?

I thought in most places it was $5,000.00,,,,,here it's $7,500.00.

He should have took it to Judge Mathis

Sincerely, Clayton