Mastro Auctions: Looking for Former Employees

[Peter_Spaeth]

Maybe Kenny, I'd have to think about that although my general understanding is that the plaintiff who has the burden of proof has to have a non-speculative damages theory and simply assuming there wouldn't have been any other bids in the but-for world of no shill bids seems awfully speculative to me. In any event, mine was less an observation about the mechanics of an actual trial than an observation that just academically speaking it's not an accurate measure of loss just to take the high bid and remove the shills.

[Kenny Cole]

Peter,

"Viewing this evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, we find that there was substantial evidence reasonably tending to support the jury's verdict. Mr. Musgrove had extensive experience in the travel business and a foundation was properly laid for his testimony relating to the value of Rainbow's good will. Indeed, appellants did not object to Mr. Musgrove's testimony and conceded that he was qualified to express an opinion on the issue of good will. Appellants argue nonetheless that the amount of damages to good will was so uncertain as to be speculative. The rule in Oklahoma, however, is that the prohibition against recovery of damages because the loss is uncertain or too speculative in nature applies to the fact of damages, not to the amount. Martin v. Griffin Television, Inc., 549 P.2d 85, 92 (Okla.1976). “Where it is made to appear that some loss has been suffered, it is proper to let the jury determine what the loss is from the best evidence the nature of the case admits.” Hardesty v. Andro Corporation–Webster Division, 555 P.2d 1030 (Okla.1976). Given the nature of good will, which is an intangible asset dependant upon a business' reputation, it was proper for the district court in this case to submit the question of damages to good will to the jury. See Westric Battery Co. v. Standard Electric Co., Inc., 522 F.2d 986, 987 n. 2 (10th Cir.1975) (“The amount cannot and hence need not be proven with absolute certainty.”). See also Kestenbaum v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 514 F.2d 690, 698 (5th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 424 U.S. 943, 96 S.Ct. 1412, 47 L.Ed.2d 349 (“The wrongdoer may not complain of inexactness where his actions preclude precise computation to the extent of the injury.”)."

Rainbow Travel Serv., Inc. v. Hilton Hotels Corp., 896 F.2d 1233, 1239–40 (10th Cir. 1990) (emphasis added).

[mantlefan]

Impressive post, Kenny. The Law is a very interesting field and I respect your ability to clarify this issue. Some compensation should have been given to the victims. Lacking that, we have no recourse except to seek out Mr. Theotakis and advise him of our displeasure with his confessed crimes.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by mantlefan

Impressive post, Kenny. The Law is a very interesting field and I respect your ability to clarify this issue. Some compensation should have been given to the victims. Lacking that, we have no recourse except to seek out Mr. Theotakis and advise him of our displeasure with his confessed crimes.

Dude, you keep saying you want to meet Theo to tell him off, but you might want to just leave it alone.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Kenny fine but I bet I could find lots of cases citing this or similar principles too and not just in a contract context:

Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 352 (1981) states: “Damages are not recoverable for loss beyond an amount that the evidence permits to be established with reasonable certainty.”

Anyhow, we have strayed I think from the topic. I have no doubt that however calculated a substantial aggregate loss was involved here.

[jerrys]

What is overlooked in the Mastro Auction case is that consignors of lots in those auctions independently took the opportunity to merge with the ongoing fraud by joining with a partner to shill bid their lots. These consignor/shill bidder teams have significantly enriched themselves while evading exposure or penalty.

[mantlefan]

Originally Posted by Leon

Dude, you keep saying you want to meet Theo to tell him off, but you might want to just leave it alone.

Leon, not sure why you seem to be defending this scumbag. And last time I checked, I don’t need your permission to speak to someone in Cleveland, dude.

If he were out of sight, I would never go looking for him.

But, if he’s sitting at HA accepting consignments, well yeah then me and a few of my buds are going to ask him about the money he stole from us. If someone who admitted cheating you and stealing from you, is prancing around in front of you, Leon, wouldn’t you want a few words with him..... ??

[Leon]

Originally Posted by mantlefan

Leon, not sure why you seem to be defending this scumbag. And last time I checked, I don’t need your permission to speak to someone in Cleveland, dude.

If he were out of sight, I would never go looking for him.

But, if he’s sitting at HA accepting consignments, well yeah then me and a few of my buds are going to ask him about the money he stole from us. If someone who admitted cheating you and stealing from you, is prancing around in front of you, Leon, wouldn’t you want a few words with him..... ??

I am not defending what he, or the others, did. It was wrong. I have already told him what I thought as we spoke at the last National. I stated my other thoughts above. Say what you want to, it's America.

[mantlefan]

Originally Posted by Leon

I am not defending what he, or the others, did. It was wrong. I have already told him what I thought as we spoke at the last National. I stated my other thoughts above. Say what you want to, it's America.

So, you’re allowed to sit down and talk to him and tell him what you thought, but I can’t? I should “leave it alone”. And 30-40 other victims also don’t have that right? Wait and see dude.