5 ms·

Stupid question: if the printer was worth $40 ($75 with shipping) how come the damages are worth $30k ? Even if Costello was right I cannot see how "damages" su

by mamon 10y ago

Stupid question: if the printer was worth $40 ($75 with shipping) how come the damages are worth $30k ? Even if Costello was right I cannot see how "damages" suffered could exceed those 75 dollars by such a huge margin. In Europe even if he had won the case he would have been awarded $75 in damages, and probably another $50 in legal costs, that's all. Not possible to win $30k out of thin air. But the difference is that in Europe "damages" mean "money lost", not "feelings hurt".

DannyBee 10y ago
"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.
- Sacho 10y ago
  What legitimate use does that request serve?
  - scott_s 10y ago
    None, which the most recent judge recognized.
  - DannyBee 10y ago
    It was originally meant to allow undisputed facts to enter the record, etc. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Request_for_admissions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Request_for_admissions You can look at the history of the FRCP to see the changes over the years in how harsh/not harsh this rule has been.
mikeash 10y ago
An adversarial system depends on the involvement of both sides. The defendant here failed to respond to a set of allegations, which made him lose by default.
- jpambrun 10y ago
  That sounds incredibly stupid. Can I just start a spamming operation where I "allege" people owe me money and hope they don't respond within 30 days?
  - DanBC 10y ago
    You'd be declared a vexatious litigant at some point, which puts some blocks on what you can do.
  - mikeash 10y ago
    As others have noted, this is a thing some scammers do. It's probably tough to turn a profit after paying court fees, service costs, and trying to collect. And if anyone decides to give you a hard time (because you accidentally targeted a lawyer with too much free time, for example) then you could end up in a world of hurt.
  - jacquesm 10y ago
    Yes you can, if you're willing to drop a few 10's of bucks on stuff from ebay, which is exactly what this guy did.
panglott 10y ago
"According to court records, Zavodnik initially filed a lawsuit in Marion County Small Claims Court, where he asked for the maximum damages of $6,000. Zavodnik lost because he had thrown away the evidence (the printer), court records said. ...In 2010, Zavodnik sent Costello, who also was representing himself in the lawsuit, paperwork asking him to admit that he was liable for more than $30,000 for breach of contract, fraud and conversion. The trial court dismissed the case, along with 26 others filed by Zavodnik, who appealed all of those dismissals, court records state. ...Zavodnik also had sent Costello two more requests for admissions. One asked Costello to admit that he conspired with the judge presiding over the case, and that he was liable for more than $300,000. Another one requested Costello to admit that he was liable for more than $600,000. 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." There's no argument anywhere that this is proportional. He just filed that he was liable for the maximum possible in each case. Conceivably he could have been found liable for $600k by default.

by mamon 10y ago

DannyBee 10y ago

"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.

Sacho 10y ago
What legitimate use does that request serve?
- scott_s 10y ago
  None, which the most recent judge recognized.
- DannyBee 10y ago
  It was originally meant to allow undisputed facts to enter the record, etc. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Request_for_admissions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Request_for_admissions You can look at the history of the FRCP to see the changes over the years in how harsh/not harsh this rule has been.

mikeash 10y ago

An adversarial system depends on the involvement of both sides. The defendant here failed to respond to a set of allegations, which made him lose by default.

jpambrun 10y ago
That sounds incredibly stupid. Can I just start a spamming operation where I "allege" people owe me money and hope they don't respond within 30 days?
- DanBC 10y ago
  You'd be declared a vexatious litigant at some point, which puts some blocks on what you can do.
- mikeash 10y ago
  As others have noted, this is a thing some scammers do. It's probably tough to turn a profit after paying court fees, service costs, and trying to collect. And if anyone decides to give you a hard time (because you accidentally targeted a lawyer with too much free time, for example) then you could end up in a world of hurt.
- jacquesm 10y ago
  Yes you can, if you're willing to drop a few 10's of bucks on stuff from ebay, which is exactly what this guy did.

panglott 10y ago

"According to court records, Zavodnik initially filed a lawsuit in Marion County Small Claims Court, where he asked for the maximum damages of $6,000. Zavodnik lost because he had thrown away the evidence (the printer), court records said. ...In 2010, Zavodnik sent Costello, who also was representing himself in the lawsuit, paperwork asking him to admit that he was liable for more than $30,000 for breach of contract, fraud and conversion. The trial court dismissed the case, along with 26 others filed by Zavodnik, who appealed all of those dismissals, court records state. ...Zavodnik also had sent Costello two more requests for admissions. One asked Costello to admit that he conspired with the judge presiding over the case, and that he was liable for more than $300,000. Another one requested Costello to admit that he was liable for more than $600,000. 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." There's no argument anywhere that this is proportional. He just filed that he was liable for the maximum possible in each case. Conceivably he could have been found liable for $600k by default.