Problem with Legendary Lot . . . Opinions?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

Misrepresentation can be by omission--see, e.g. Section 551 of the Restatement 2d Torts. I'm defending a case now with trial set in February that is based in large part on this theory.

Yes, but you need a duty to disclose where an omission is concerned, mere fact of materiality doesn't impose a duty. No fiduciary relationship here, no incomplete disclosure rendered misleading by the omission. Maybe something else?

[nolemmings]

In Arizona at least you would have such a duty in virtually any buyer/seller transaction, any transaction in which you have a pecuniary interest.

BTW, the contract claim, again here in AZ, would be pretty close to a dunk if the facts as described were proven true IMO. That would give David his rescission and, as prevailing party, his attorney's fees.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

In Arizona at least you would have such a duty in virtually any buyer/seller transaction, any transaction in which you have a pecuniary interest.

Damn liberal state.

Doesn't follow the Restatement section you quoted, apparently.
"Unless he is under some one of the duties of disclosure stated in Subsection (2), one party to a business transaction is not liable
to the other for harm caused by his failure to disclose to the other facts of which he knows the other is ignorant and which he
further knows the other, if he knew of them, would regard as material in determining his course of action in the transaction in
question."

[autograf]

I'm sure you're familiar with SGC's definition of SGC10............

This card usually exhibits many of these characteristics: heavy print spots, heavy crease(s), pinhole(s), color or focus imperfections or discoloration, surface scuffing or tears, rounded and/or fraying corners, ink or pencil marking(s), and lack of all or some original gloss, small portions of the card may be missing.

Seems like the grade is commensurate with the cards, so I guess had you had full disclosure that there were pinholes (or cuts as you later described them), you would have not bid at the level you did. To me, they look better than a SGC10 with the small scans. I would have asked what made them a SGC10 but they certainly could have/should have noted that the cards had cuts in them.

Good luck with whatever you choose to do.............

[nolemmings]

Damn liberal state.

Yup, that sure describes Arizona. A deep blue State all right

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

Yup, that sure describes Arizona. A deep blue State all right

LOL. Tuscon did elect a Democratic congresswoman though.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

First, as for the lot. I just had some time to look at the cards and I just noticed that there are ten cards of five different players. There are four Alexanders graded SGC 10. Certainly out of the four Alexanders there is one that is preferable to the others. That leaves the only other SGC 10 and that is the Frisch. Hopefully that one doesn't have the major damage that bothers you. So in short, I would pick out the best example of each player and sell the remaining five and try to upgrade the ones you aren't happy with.

Second, I'll thrown in my legal 2 cents even though I'm not a lawyer, but I live in Texas as does David and have had some experience in consumer litigation. As stated by another poster, the SGC 10 definition does appear to describe the wear and damage found on the cards. If David has any chance of a legal remedy he may consider the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. It reads as follows and I highlighted in bold #24 on the "Laundry List" which probably has the best chance of prevailing in a court of law - although it still may be a reach in my opinion.


Sec. 17.46. DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES UNLAWFUL. (a) False, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce are hereby declared unlawful and are subject to action by the consumer protection division under Sections 17.47, 17.58, 17.60, and 17.61 of this code.

(b) Except as provided in Subsection (d) of this section, the term "false, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices" includes, but is not limited to, the following acts:

(1) passing off goods or services as those of another;

(2) causing confusion or misunderstanding as to the source, sponsorship, approval, or certification of goods or services;

(3) causing confusion or misunderstanding as to affiliation, connection, or association with, or certification by, another;

(4) using deceptive representations or designations of geographic origin in connection with goods or services;

(5) representing that goods or services have sponsorship, approval, characteristics, ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities which they do not have or that a person has a sponsorship, approval, status, affiliation, or connection which he does not;

(6) representing that goods are original or new if they are deteriorated, reconditioned, reclaimed, used, or secondhand;

(7) representing that goods or services are of a particular standard, quality, or grade, or that goods are of a particular style or model, if they are of another;

(8) disparaging the goods, services, or business of another by false or misleading representation of facts;

(9) advertising goods or services with intent not to sell them as advertised;

(10) advertising goods or services with intent not to supply a reasonable expectable public demand, unless the advertisements disclosed a limitation of quantity;

(11) making false or misleading statements of fact concerning the reasons for, existence of, or amount of price reductions;

(12) representing that an agreement confers or involves rights, remedies, or obligations which it does not have or involve, or which are prohibited by law;

(13) knowingly making false or misleading statements of fact concerning the need for parts, replacement, or repair service;

(14) misrepresenting the authority of a salesman, representative or agent to negotiate the final terms of a consumer transaction;

(15) basing a charge for the repair of any item in whole or in part on a guaranty or warranty instead of on the value of the actual repairs made or work to be performed on the item without stating separately the charges for the work and the charge for the warranty or guaranty, if any;

(16) disconnecting, turning back, or resetting the odometer of any motor vehicle so as to reduce the number of miles indicated on the odometer gauge;

(17) advertising of any sale by fraudulently representing that a person is going out of business;

(18) advertising, selling, or distributing a card which purports to be a prescription drug identification card issued under Section 4151.152, Insurance Code, in accordance with rules adopted by the commissioner of insurance, which offers a discount on the purchase of health care goods or services from a third party provider, and which is not evidence of insurance coverage, unless:

(A) the discount is authorized under an agreement between the seller of the card and the provider of those goods and services or the discount or card is offered to members of the seller;

(B) the seller does not represent that the card provides insurance coverage of any kind; and

(C) the discount is not false, misleading, or deceptive;

(19) using or employing a chain referral sales plan in connection with the sale or offer to sell of goods, merchandise, or anything of value, which uses the sales technique, plan, arrangement, or agreement in which the buyer or prospective buyer is offered the opportunity to purchase merchandise or goods and in connection with the purchase receives the seller's promise or representation that the buyer shall have the right to receive compensation or consideration in any form for furnishing to the seller the names of other prospective buyers if receipt of the compensation or consideration is contingent upon the occurrence of an event subsequent to the time the buyer purchases the merchandise or goods;

(20) representing that a guarantee or warranty confers or involves rights or remedies which it does not have or involve, provided, however, that nothing in this subchapter shall be construed to expand the implied warranty of merchantability as defined in Sections 2.314 through 2.318 and Sections 2A.212 through 2A.216 to involve obligations in excess of those which are appropriate to the goods;

(21) promoting a pyramid promotional scheme, as defined by Section 17.461;

(22) representing that work or services have been performed on, or parts replaced in, goods when the work or services were not performed or the parts replaced;

(23) filing suit founded upon a written contractual obligation of and signed by the defendant to pay money arising out of or based on a consumer transaction for goods, services, loans, or extensions of credit intended primarily for personal, family, household, or agricultural use in any county other than in the county in which the defendant resides at the time of the commencement of the action or in the county in which the defendant in fact signed the contract; provided, however, that a violation of this subsection shall not occur where it is shown by the person filing such suit he neither knew or had reason to know that the county in which such suit was filed was neither the county in which the defendant resides at the commencement of the suit nor the county in which the defendant in fact signed the contract;

(24) failing to disclose information concerning goods or services which was known at the time of the transaction if such failure to disclose such information was intended to induce the consumer into a transaction into which the consumer would not have entered had the information been disclosed;

(25) using the term "corporation," "incorporated," or an abbreviation of either of those terms in the name of a business entity that is not incorporated under the laws of this state or another jurisdiction;

(26) selling, offering to sell, or illegally promoting an annuity contract under Chapter 22, Acts of the 57th Legislature, 3rd Called Session, 1962 (Article 6228a-5, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes), with the intent that the annuity contract will be the subject of a salary reduction agreement, as defined by that Act, if the annuity contract is not an eligible qualified investment under that Act or is not registered with the Teacher Retirement System of Texas as required by Section 8A of that Act; or

(27) taking advantage of a disaster declared by the governor under Chapter 418, Government Code, by:

(A) selling or leasing fuel, food, medicine, or another necessity at an exorbitant or excessive price; or

(B) demanding an exorbitant or excessive price in connection with the sale or lease of fuel, food, medicine, or another necessity.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.u.../htm/BC.17.htm

[Rich Klein]

David:

That is a perfect chance to post those scans and let us see the visual evidence.

Rich

[Fred]

Without having to go through every post, can someone please tell me the lot number and end date for the auction to which this thread was born.

[vargha]

Originally Posted by Rich Klein

David:

That is a perfect chance to post those scans and let us see the visual evidence.

Rich

The scanner doesn't work on the new computer. I need to move it over to another computer and get this done. Sorry for being a flake about this.