We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks.

RR Auction Lawsuit: No Evidence of Shill Bidding

The judge rejected Michael Johnson's fourth attempt to add shill bidding allegations to his RR Auction lawsuit a few weeks ago. With his attempt to make it a class action lawsuit failing in March 2015 and his attempt to add shill bidding and another claim failing on August 12, Johnson's case heads to trial in January, apparently on his original claims only.

Johnson Attempt to Modify RR Auction Lawsuit Rejected.

According to a declaration by Johnson's lead attorney, Dugan Kelley, they spent seven months and more than $50,000 investigating shill bidding. Johnson's motion to amend his lawsuit would have necessarily included any evidence of RR Auction shill bidding that they discovered during their investigation. They had to come up with anything they could to try to get the judge to approve Johnson's motion. But they presented no evidence of RR Auction illegal bidding, and they didn't say that they found any evidence.

In the end, the judge rejected Johnson's motion primarily because he took too long to file it: 16 months after the suspicious 2008 affidavit by Kay Burris came out in January 2015, which the judge ruled inadmissible. RR Auction fired Burris after discovering that she embezzled hundreds of thousands of dollars from them, and the affidavit, if real, was obviously a negotiating tactic. You don't know what if anything in it is true. Burris tragically committed suicide during the police investigation, shortly after the date on the affidavit.

I'm sure that Johnson and his associates will continue to try to smear RR Auction, but if any evidence of illegal bidding practices by them existed, they would have at least found something by now.

Stick a fork in it. It's done.

Tags: michael johnson, r, r&amp, r&r auction, rr auction, rr auction lawsuit, rrauction, rrauctionlawsuit.com, shill bidding

3 members like this

Comment by Bruce Juice on September 6, 2016 at 12:29pm: This guy is clearly a disgruntled former customer who had sued many companies in the past. RR Auction offered him a full refund if he returned the items in question and he refused -- wanting to sue instead and get himself a big payday. I'm glad the courts have ruled against him and I hope he is racking up a huge legal bill. The courts are busy enough without these ridiculous lawsuits.

Comment by airjordanlover on September 6, 2016 at 12:31pm: This Johnson guy just likes to file lawsuits against every company that sells memorabilia and i hope he loses!

Comment by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on September 6, 2016 at 12:49pm: Airjordanlover, please don't post links to your site or we'll have to remove you for spam. Thanks

Comment by James Stone on September 6, 2016 at 1:54pm: Plaintiff seems crazy. Guy seems to have an endless amount of time, energy, and money to waste on nonsense. I sure could think of better things to do with all of those 3 things.

Comment by James Stone on September 6, 2016 at 1:59pm: That being said, RR has done a few things I didn't like. I inquired about a COA on an item I had already purchased. They said it would be $50 for the COA and $11 to ship, and I thought "$11 to ship a piece of paper?". So they asked if I wanted it? I didn't reply. They put the charge on my card and sent it anyway. No bueno.

Comment by JAKE JONES on September 6, 2016 at 6:05pm: Always look on both sides carefully before judging. The remarks of "i don`t recall", hurt his credibility don`t you think?

Comment by James Stone on September 7, 2016 at 3:41am: The "I don't recall" depositions were unsettling. But again, the plantiff was offered his money back for the item and he decided to have an all out war with RR, too much time and money on his hands, and now he is going to lose.

Comment by Eric Keith Longo on September 7, 2016 at 7:43am: Thanks for the update, Steve. Eric

Comment by Paul on September 8, 2016 at 4:18pm: Was this the guy who sued Epperson about psa failing a eagles guitar and Zepplin signed lp?
Does anyone know the outcome of that?