Correct me if I'm wrong. CU, parent company of pgcs, sued 3 dudes for "allegedly" doc'ing coins using "dolphins with laser beams" as well as other methods to otherwise change coins and then submit them for certification ? The suit was dismissed with prejudice which opens the door for 3 dudes to seek SLAPP case v. CU (as well as their attorneys) ? I have a relative who is doing a documentary with an unnamed tv host,, in his travels he came across a similar story regarding an unnamed owner of things in the desert that have a lot of lights on them. The owner was sued and the dude lost.. owner sued back and won some "9" digits in compenstation via SLAPP..... so the story goes from what I hear from young pup producer... with figures that big I'm sure those inclined could leg out the details. SLAPP's appears to be a heck of a money maker.... I often wonder if the RipOft report site was built upon that as a business case.... anyway,,,,, So, do ya'll think CU has a bill coming ? if so, what do ya think it means to the hobby ?
I'm no lawyer,, but I think SLAPP is a tort action that can be sought for "malicious prosecution"... essentially a means to take action if you are sued by someone simply to make you spend $ defending yourself where you've commited no civil or legal wrong doing. Pretty sure slander and libel can be tossed in the same (or corresponding) action to juice the pot. Anyway, this is kinda old stuff but I thought it was interesting and important stuff to the hobby. It kinda fizzed out so figured I'd relight the fire to see what folks have heard: http://www.cointalk.com/t156333/ Here's another interesting one that looks even newer... geez. Are folks just that suit crazy or what ? http://www.coininfo.com/page/$50+Million+Coin+Industry+Suit+Filed
This is not my field of "expertise" but it is never good when your case is dismissed with prejudice. Essentially, PCGS cannot bring those same claims, even modified against those same defendants. If I had to guess why it was dismissed, I would think it was because PCGS did not suffer any damages. The coins were submitted with the corresponding fees, PCGS examined the coins and determined they were not genuine or altered, and that was it. However, If PCGS had certified the coins, and later, it was found they were "fake/altered" and PCGS had to pay out money because of it, then they would have a claim. Again, without knowing more, that is my off the cuff legal thought. Because it appears PCGS did not incur any loss, it should not have filed the lawsuit. Again, should more information come to my knowledge, this non-legal thought is only lay opinion.
