We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks.
Authenticity is Everything
No One Joins Class Action Lawsuit Against RR Auction; Court Rejects
We received a press release from RR Auction regarding a hearing today in Santa Barbara, California on the Johnson v. RR Auction class action lawsuit. We'll have a full report on the hearing later today, so I'll just post the first couple of paragraphs:
Lawyers for Michael Johnson, the son of an oil industry tycoon, effectively admitted defeat today in Santa Barbara County Superior Court after Judge Donna Geck issued a tentative ruling denying Johnson’s motion for class action certification in a lawsuit filed in October 2012 in which Johnson alleged that $84,000 in autographed items he’d purchased through R&R were later found to be inauthentic.
In what R&R’s attorney’s predict will be a fatal blow to Johnson’s suit, now on its second set of lawyers, Judge Geck issued a six-page tentative ruling Wednesday denying class action status to the case “Because of the findings that the class is not ascertainable, the class is not numerous and individual issues predominate over common issues.”
Tags: michael johnson, r&r, rr auction, rrauctionlawsuit.com
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Bruce Juice on
-
Wow -- great news for RR Auction. From what I heard and saw in the depositions, the guy filing the complaint WAS offered his money back if he returned the items. He never did -- preferring to sue and try to make a name for himself. SO glad he lost.
-
Permalink Reply by Rick Meyer on
-
Has R&R produced evidence that they offered his money back or we just taking their word for it?
-
Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on
-
I've seen emails where they ask Johnson to send them the autographs that PSA/DNA wouldn't authenticate. He said he would but he never did. In his declaration he said that nowhere in RR's guarantee does it say that you need to return the autographs to get your money back.
BTW, according to one of Johnson's declarations, PSA only looked at 12 of his autographs from RR with hammer prices that totaled $8,008.
I've never heard anyone complain that RR would not honor their guarantee. I searched AML as well and couldn't find one instance. Does anyone know someone who says they wouldn't for them?
The Karen Burris allegations are a shock, but she embezzled hundreds of thousands of dollars from RR. I liked Kay, and it blew me away to hear about the embezzlement back in 2008. If someone is dishonest enough to embezzle for years, how can you take anything they say at face value?
-
Permalink Reply by Scott Paul on
-
Even if not stated I would think a money back guarantee would at least imply sending back the item. Even if it didn't if the autograph is fake why would anyone want to keep it. Makes no sense really. I can see if PSA said they were of the opinion it was not real then sure ask for your money back and send the item back. I can also see RR not wanting to give money back and let the person keep the autographs too. Something just seems odd about the whole thing I suppose until the dusts settle we just won't know.
-
-
Are those emails posted somewhere Steve? I don't think I've seen that.
Whole things a mess. Johnson is sue happy but R&R don't appear like folks I would do business with. They came across to me as snakes.
-
-
They're not online as far as I know, Rick, but I have them. I reviewed at least 700 pages of pleadings, depositions and other documentation.
I had a reporter cover the hearing and write up a piece on the case. It's online at www.autographmagazine.com.
-
Permalink Reply by Dan Gregory on
-
Not surprised the lawsuit was dismissed but it does not let RR off the hook. Serious questions need to be answered about their way of doing business, authenticating and why they sold so many bad items
-
-
I'm not sure, but I think he may be able to.
-
-
Was just denied class action status. He can still proceed as a single plaintiff. Guy is persistent so odds are he will proceed without class action.
-
Permalink Reply by Mike T on
-
Not surprising, this is an individual case, they probably only pursued class action status to excuse the way they are posting all the details publicly. I'm not sure about being a "fatal blow", seems as if he will just continue as a single plaintiff.
The judge only ruled on class action status, correct? Unless there is more, he didn't actually look at any of the details of the case, only that there wasn't enough people to consider it a class action lawsuit.
-
Permalink Reply by Dane on
-
Not being able to file as a class is usually a serious blow to legal cases, as individuals typically can't afford to pursue litigation without class status. In this particular case, the lack of class status means Mr Johnson must shoulder all litigation costs on his own.
This also results in a second problem, as Mr Johnson will no longer have the "worst case scenario" leverage of all sales to anyone in California being lumped together for the jury pool to potentially present as an award number. I guess the simplest way to explain this one is as follows:
Suppose RR figures they have a 85% chance of winning the case. That means there's a 15% chance of them losing some amount between the $8008 in hammer price of the items found to be not likely genuine and whatever Johnson is asking for, plus attorney's fees. Let's say that the high number is $90k. If this had been granted status as a class, the action could have resulted in a potential award in the millions of dollars, if not more.
Given a 15% chance of losing $90k, R&R may seek to fight the case in court, but if that same 15% outcome would result in a multi-million dollar loss, they would be more likely to simply settle out of court.
The argument about not being required to return the items to get his money back would be one that might be considered a legitimate argument for a class of individuals, as it might establish that as a reasonable contention. However, by not being granted class status, it's far more unlikely that a judge would allow that as an argument for the plaintiff party, since the defendant clearly showed non-malicious intent by offering to refund the plaintiff upon return of the items.
Essentially, the removal of threat of class action status for the case likely ends the litigation aspect of the case, as R&R could argue that they made every effort to refund Mr Johnson. If he chose to not return the items to R&R (since they're an auction house, they'd need to have the items back for insurance reasons and to return the items to the consignor(s) in the auction), they can't proceed with his refund. He'll much more likely return the items or end the litigation, since he's lost the leverage to argue his $84,000 "loss," let alone the millions that would have been argued in a class action case.
The other way to look at it is as an actuary would:
85% refund of $8008 = $6806.80
15% litigation loss of $84,000 plus attorney fees (another 35%?) = $16380100% valuation of case = $23186.80
Probable settlement out of court of $15,000.
Class action outcome would be lower, as what must be proven is different, so it might be closer to 60/40.60% chance of having to refund all participants for whatever the courts deemed non-authentic (possibly still only the $8008 offered to Johnson in the first place)
40% chance of having a jury award some ridiculous amount that might bankrupt the company100% likely settlement which might grant Johnson $60k as class representative and 25% off BP fees for all other litigants (or something equally unfair/inane).
Photos
Videos
Groups
© 2024 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
