Slashdot Mirror
Man Sued For $30K Over $40 Printer He Sold On Craigslist (usatoday.com)
An anonymous reader cites an article on USA Today: Selling a used, black-and-white printer through Craigslist seemed simple and straightforward to Doug Costello. It wasn't. What the 66-year-old Massachusetts man didn't know then is that he would spend the next 6 and a half years embroiled in a complicated and confusing legal dispute in Indiana over that printer, which, according to its buyer, was broken. He would find himself liable for about $30,000 in damages. He would pay a lawyer at least $12,000 in his battle to escape the legal mess. And it all started with a piece of hardware he sold online for about $40 in 2009. With shipping and other costs, the total was less than $75, according to court records.Gersh Zavodnik, the printer's buyer, has been described as "prolific, abusive litigant" who has brought dozens of lawsuits against individuals and businesses. He often asks for "astronomical" damages.
So, you left a paper trail... Craigslist sales should always be in person, cash, and otherwise as anonymous as possible. Use a separate gmail account, fake name, protect yourself.
Along with
"No warranty from seller"
"Seller assumes no liability"
"All sales final"
"No Refunds"
because of this one person? when i was in italy in the 90's you needed to bribe people to get home phone service, gasoline was like $8 a gallon, half the country shuts down in july and the other half in august, medicine was straight out of a history book, etc italy is clearly broken
It doesn't. His cased was dismissed from small claims, because he threw out the evidence (printer). He refiled in Superior Court with a bunch of new complaints. He didn't sue for $30,000, what he did was send a Request for Admission to the opponent requesting he admit to owing the 30,000 or the 300,000 or the 600,000. Marion County has a rule that if you don't respond to a Request for Admission in 30 days then you are presumed to have admitted the fact at issue. That was the plaintiff's game here. Send a bunch of requests and hope they don't respond.
If you are at the threshold of itemized deductions donating an item can make almost as much money as selling it used, since you can write off donated items.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
How is there any risk if you have a legitimate case? The only reason a legitimate case would lose is if they didn't have the resources to adequately present their case, and if the loser pays, then this ceases to be an issue.
I Am Not A Lawyer, but my husband is. He often counsels his clients to go into settlement with decent terms, even if they don't get every last thing they want. But sometimes they are stubborn.. they refuse to give the other side anything at all, because they are so convinced of their righteousness. But the court system is a crapshoot, even if you have a good case. First, it's going to be pricey regardless of the outcome. Second... you don't know what a jury will believe. You don't know when you'll get the judge on a bad day. You don't know if your client will lose his temper and shout the wrong thing. There are a lot of variables that you just CAN'T control.
I fear a loser-pays system because you can be in the right, and you can still lose a case. You can still get burned. It's a risk, and sometimes risks pay off, and sometimes they don't.
Also, under loser-pays, the little guy might be guilty of the offense, but it's a very minor offense -- like, say, sharing a song on a P2P network. That small offense would involve exorbitant fees for the loser.
When people think "loser pays," they're usually thinking "the big bad rich guy pays for the legal costs of the little guy who got wronged." But the flip side of the coin is that justice is not perfect even if everyone is entitled to it.
Yes they do. In some countries loser has to pay for all court costs. This prevents people and companies from bring a suit they know they will lose.
Here in west australia you would bring a claim like this to the small claims tribunal, or in other states magistrates course. You generally dont employ lawyers at these things, and its largely a couple of people resolving a dispute in front of the judge whos primarily there to mediate the dispute rather than award outrageous and punitive damages. Its pretty cheap, and appropriate for small claims.
The littigant would have been awarded $75 (the amount he paid) and possibly a refund of his court fees.
Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
Does it work differently in any other country?
I don't know about other countries but in here in Finland you can only sue for real damages and costs, not astronomic sums like this. So here you could sue for 40 dollars plus legal costs in this case.
In countries where the loser pays the legal fees, the person with more money is never taken to court because suing will bankrupt the little guy if he loses. I'm not going to sue for my $500 loss if I have a 10% chance of losing and he'll spend 30k defending himself. Loser pays means that poor and middle class can't seek justice at all.
In Germany, for a $500 case the cost will be around $100. The lawyer won't do much work, and the judge will also not do much work, for a $500 case.
You didn't finish reading the article, did you?
The appeals court threw out that $30k judgment as having no basis in reality, and 'The appeals court ordered the trial court to hold a hearing to determine whether the case should be dismissed "based on Zavodnik's repeated, flagrant, and continuing failure to comply with Indiana's rules of procedure." '
That is how Scientology works. "The purpose of the suit is to harass and discourage rather than win. The law can be used very easily to harass, and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the thin edge anyway, well knowing that he is no authorized, will generally be sufficient to cause his professional decease. If possible, or course, ruin him utterly" - L. Ron Hubbard, The Scientologist, a Manual on the Dissemination of Material, 1955
In what kind of screwed up world does not responding to a request for an admission of guilt make you liable for a million dollars in damages?
In the imaginary made-up world of USAToday journalism. This was a civil lawsuit, which doesn't even have a concept of "guilt" and "innocence". I have don't know what actually happened, but it certainly wasn't what TFA described. My best guess is that he failed to respond to interrogatories.
Nothing, but the rich dude will only have the statutory fees reimbursed in the case he wins the lawsuit. The lawyer fees are specified by the law on remuneration of attorneys, so if you want to pay more than that, it will make your lawyer happy, but won't matter in the court.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap