The Ohtani 50 50 ball -- lawsuit to stop Goldin Auction

[packs]

But would he need to be awarded damages if he's awarded possession of the ball? I just don't see how Goldin, who doesn't own the ball in any way, can decide unilaterally that it will sell a ball whose ownership is in question. How can the consignment agreement stand if the consignor is said not to own the ball?

If I put myself in the position of the 18 year old fighting for ownership, if I'm awarded the ball and am declared the ball's rightful owner because it was stolen from me, I don't know what it would take to rectify things with me from Goldin. Money wouldn't be the issue. It would feel like the ball was stolen from me twice and I never had any agency in a situation where I own something.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

But would he need to be awarded damages if he's awarded possession of the ball? I just don't see how Goldin, who doesn't own the ball in any way, can decide unilaterally that it will sell a ball whose ownership is in question. How can the consignment agreement stand if the consignor is said not to own the ball?

If I put myself in the position of the 18 year old fighting for ownership, if I'm awarded the ball and am declared the ball's rightful owner because it was stolen from me, I don't know what it would take to rectify things with me from Goldin. Money wouldn't be the issue.

The next step in the case is a preliminary injunction hearing. The judge probably won't decide who owns the ball, just whether the kid has demonstrated enough likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm to stop the auction. I assume as to irreparable harm he will make the argument you articulate, that the ball is unique and at the end of the day, if he wins, money damages won't make him whole. I haven't researched Florida law on remedies so this is just off general principles.

[steve B]

Entirely out of curiosity, and knowing the answer might not be out there.

How do lawyers take these cases? Paid? or contingency?

Seems like it's very iffy all around.

And of course, it's only worth much of anything as a milestone ball. The 12th hr by a guy likely to end up with 12 in his career isn't any big deal except to the person that catches it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I assume Matus' lawyer is on contingency. What's iffy about it?

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I assume Matus' lawyer is on contingency. What's iffy about it?

I just strikes me as something that's more of a 50/50 thing. Not sure where the line gets drawn between contingency and "I need $X up front"

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by steve B

I just strikes me as something that's more of a 50/50 thing. Not sure where the line gets drawn between contingency and "I need $X up front"

Entirely up to the lawyer and client how the lawyer gets paid. Contingency fees can make sense for both parties in a lot of cases.

[ullmandds]

im guessing if original posessor of this ball agreed to terms with the dodgers and made a trade...these 2 other claimants would've never come forward...additionally...if original posessor of the ball didn't bring it to market so soon with such a high price tag...these 2 claimants would've never come forward.