Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Man sued for $30K over $40 printer he sold on Craigslist

usatoday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 232 posts

Re: Man sued for $30K over $40 printer he sold on Craigslist

#141

Post by cortesoft »

rdtsc wrote: post #78
jjnoakes wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether he wanted them delivered or not, the legal system should require proof on behalf of the server that the person being served was served correctly. Basic first class mail should never suffice.

It should but it doesn't obviously. Perhaps a video recording of delivery and asking for a signature should be required. Obviously some defendants could just start running away and refuse to sign, thus delaying the lawsuit forever. But also throwing the packet of paper in a mail with a stamp or dropping it on the front porch while yelling "you've been served" is also not quite cutting it. Something in the middle is n…

You do realize that rules around this already exist, right? For example, in california: https://www.serve-now.com/resources/process-serving-laws/cal...

Re: Man sued for $30K over $40 printer he sold on Craigslist

#142

Post by [deleted] »

chdir wrote: post #106

Does it help to have a generic boilerplate contract (jurisdiction-wise) signed by both buyer & seller for such transactions, where the buyer would sign that they have inspected the item to their knowledge and assume full responsibility of the purchase, and that they won't hold the seller responsible for blah blah. At the same time, the seller assumes that they have given up ownership of the said item for whatever mon…

[deleted]

Re: Man sued for $30K over $40 printer he sold on Craigslist

#143

Post by comex »

nickff wrote: post #76
texuf wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or judges? I would want to sue the judge that awarded $30,000 for an allegedly broken printer. Edit: Found this article from Sep. 2014. [0] "The [Indiana] state high court, in an order issued Tuesday, called Zavodnik 'a prolific, abusive litigant' and put him on notice. In the unanimous ruling, the five justices warned the Ukraine-born U.S. citizen that he 'can expect any further abusive litigation practices ... to b…

The problem is that it seems that the judge made the legally correct determination, and that the majority of judges understand that this type of suit is ridiculous, but they have no tools to stop it.

It wasn't legally correct, at least in the opinion of the appeals court which, as the article states, ultimately reversed the $30,000 award.

Re: Man sued for $30K over $40 printer he sold on Craigslist

#144

Post by michaelmrose »

vonmoltke wrote: post #27
jimrandomh wrote: post #13

Under a sensible legal system, this is a crime. It's called "barratry": filing baseless lawsuits in order to harass or to extract a settlement. In most US jurisdictions, however, it's not legally recognized as a crime, and so it's widespread. From a defendant's point of view, however, it's basically equivalent to getting mugged.

Which "sensible legal system[s]" are these, and which ones punish plaintiffs for it rather than lawyers? Edit: I originally said "punish defendants ", but meant plaintiffs.

He acts as his own lawyer in the 123 meritless lawsuits he has filed since 2008. He probably couldn't afford to pay lawyers for this even if anyone would take the case.

Re: Man sued for $30K over $40 printer he sold on Craigslist

#145

Post by [deleted] »

jjnoakes wrote: post #98
jkaunisv1 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Short of using something like cash...for buying something off Craigslist? What else would you use? Why do you make it sound so difficult to use the most easily accessible form of currency around? Joe Craigslist isn't going to have a debit/credit machine for me to pay on. I'm not writing him a personal cheque. Use a burner email, don't give names, meet in a public place..how would you track somebody down like that?

Because buying something online might mean the item has to be shipped? Since buyer and seller may not be able to meet up for some reason? Mailing cash seems like a terrible idea. Do you think we should find a cash escrow service too?

[deleted]

Re: Man sued for $30K over $40 printer he sold on Craigslist

#146

Post by scott_s »

chasing wrote: post #9

If I'm reading correctly, the key bit is: ----- Because Costello did not respond to all three requests for admissions within 30 days of receiving them, and did not ask for an extension of time, as required by Indiana trial rules, Costello admitted to the liabilities and damages by default. He also did not appear at a July 2013 hearing, according to court records. Costello said he never received the requests for admis…

From the judgement (http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/05231602nhv.pdf):

"More fundamentally, the plaintiff in General Motors Corp. did not ask the defendant to admit liability 400, 4000, or 8000 times greater than the amount originally in dispute, as Zavodnik did here. Zavodnik’s misuse of Rule 36 is plain. He did not send requests claiming $30,000 and $300,000 and $600,000 in damages because he believes those figures are legally justified and thought Costello might agree; he sent them because he hoped Costello would not respond, rendering the matters admitted by operation of Rule 36. An important purpose of the rule is to more quickly and efficiently reach a resolution based on the actual facts; Zavodnik used the rule as a way to avoid such a resolution. The trial court’s partial denial of Costello’s motion to withdraw served to ratify Zavodnik’s blatant abuse of the rule."

Zavodnik was using these admission of discovery as a weapon. Note that these are not suits themselves; Zavodnik is clearly trying to abuse corners of the legal system for his own benefit. It's unrealistic to assume a lay-person will know the full legal ramifications of such things, particularly after already winning a case related to the matter. The most recent judge recognizes this, disagrees with you, and has overturned these admissions.

Re: Man sued for $30K over $40 printer he sold on Craigslist

#147

Post by fiatmoney »

jjnoakes wrote: post #70
fiatmoney wrote: post #11

There's no good reason not to be relatively anonymous when buying or selling on craigslist.

When money changes hands, short of using something like cash, how does John Doe remain anonymous? I assume once the matter is in front of a court it is only a matter of time before your identity is readily available. Some form of obfuscating one's name and/or address may raise the bar a bit, but I don't see how this is a solution to the problem of malicious litigation for selling something on craig's list.

The point is to keep trolls like the one in the article from being easily able to serve & sue you. Realistically, they're unlikely to go through elaborate chains of subpoenas; they'll find an easier target.

Re: Man sued for $30K over $40 printer he sold on Craigslist

#148

Post by lb1lf »

MarlonPro wrote: post #8

I remember what a lawyer said in a case that I served as juror, "the US justice system is not perfect but it's the best justice system in the world."

As a former colleague of mine was fond of saying: "The United States offers the best justice system money can buy."

Re: Man sued for $30K over $40 printer he sold on Craigslist

#149

Post by scott_s »

Sacho wrote: post #138
DannyBee wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Stupid question: if the printer was worth $40 ($75 with shipping) how come the damages are worth $30k" That part is about the admissions, where the plaintiff requested the defendant admit damages were 30k (or whatever), and anything not responded to is considered admitted.

What legitimate use does that request serve?

None, which the most recent judge recognized.

Re: Man sued for $30K over $40 printer he sold on Craigslist

#150

Post by pbhjpbhj »

wl wrote: post #24
baldfat wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Default in court is just broken. Facts matter more then did someone show up. This is just broken.

If you can avoid adverse judgements by just not showing up for court, you incentivize people to not show up. That's not any more fair. There has to be something to lose for not showing up and default is what the legal system has chosen.

>If you can avoid adverse judgements by just not showing up for court //

That's not what the parent said though. If you don't show up IMO the court should not take any default position but should decide the case on the facts put before it. That's not avoiding an adverse judgement, that's just not assuming one side is right just because the other side hasn't presented its case.

Post reply on HN