EP09: Exploring the Taylor Swift ticket case

Episode Notes

Transcript

Alvin Wolff:

You probably ought to go to a psychiatrist and figure out when it all started.

Christine Byers:

Welcome to The Case Doctors.

Alvin Wolff:

To prompt you to spend 14 grand for a Taylor Swift Concert.

Christine Byers:

With John Simon and Alvin Wolff.

John Simon:

Wait a minute. You just lost half of your audience.

Christine Byers:

You did. The show where two of the greatest legal minds offer you advice on your cases.

Alvin Wolff:

Hey, I like Taylor Swift. I love the new album, Confessions of a Show Girl.

Christine Byers:

The case doctors will see you now. Welcome to the Case Doctors. I’m your host, Christine Byers of Simon Law, and I’m joined by the case doctors, John Simon and Alvin Wolff. Now, between them, they have more than 80 years of experience as plaintiff’s attorneys, so there really isn’t a scenario they haven’t already encountered on a case and figured out how to handle it. Now, they’re offering you the chance to tell them about the various problems or issues that are coming up in your cases and hear their diagnosis. But first, let’s turn to some of the civil cases making headlines and hear what the case doctors have to say about them. One of our first cases in hot topics today, gentlemen, brings us over to New Jersey. There was recently an American Conference Institute forum on pharma and biotech patent litigation in New York City.

John Simon:

Right up my alley.

Christine Byers:

Where’s

John Simon:

Your

Alvin Wolff:

Brother?

Christine Byers:

What was interesting about it was six judges with significant experience overseeing pharmaceutical patent litigation in the districts of New Jersey and Delaware urged litigators on Tuesday to rely on the expertise of local counsel if they were hoping to impress the court. So I kind of feel like this is a universal message. The judges in particular stressed the importance of listening to local counsel on what’s appropriate in the courtroom. One of the judges said, while attorneys may talk among themselves about judges, they need to remember the opposite is true. We spend an awful lot of time talking about the lawyers who appear here in front of us.

John Simon:

I bet

Christine Byers:

They do. Your credibility is your biggest asset. So how important do you think it is for outside counsel? Both of you have worked with outside counsel relying on your expertise and knowledge of the local system.

Alvin Wolff:

Well, I always wonder when you have a significant case why an insurance company’s going to hire a lawyer who comes in from New York or Chicago and to St. Louis to handle a case. I think it’s absurd. By the same token, if I’ve got a case in out state Missouri, I’m going to have local counsel help me and guide me through everything that I need to do. Chances are pretty good that he’s going to know the judge. He’s going to know the jury panel and he’s going to be very helpful.

John Simon:

Yeah. Same thing. If we have a case of any significance in another state, we always get local counsel. I think it’s a big mistake not to get local counsel. I’ve always wondered too how, and I see that a lot where a case will be pending for two or three years and then it doesn’t settle and then we’re going to trial and literally two weeks before trial, somebody kind of parachutes in that doesn’t know anything about the case, hasn’t worked on the case. And they’re going to come in and be quote, try the case. And I’ve never seen that work out well for the other side when that happens.

Alvin Wolff:

And they always want a continuance.

John Simon:

First thing, obviously, come in and continue it. I had a case when I was a young lawyer and there was an issue and it was a trial and it was a pretrial and there was an issue about whether some evidence would come in or not. And I found a case. We had briefed it and argued it or briefed it. And I found a case that was against me. It was a Missouri case and the other side didn’t even have it. And I just saw that I was wrong. My position was wrong. And one of the judges in the city, I came in the next day. It wasn’t a real big deal, but I just said, “Hey, there’s a case right on point. They’re right about that. ” And I got treated so well by that judge on rulings in that case. And not just that, I had other cases in front of her and it happens.

I guarantee you that I tell the young lawyers here all the time. Judges talk about lawyers. Hell, we talk about lawyers. We talk about judges.

Christine Byers:

Have you had experience with outside counsel coming in, hiring you, and then not necessarily being particularly respectful of you and trying to just say, “No, no, I’ve got this. Sit down.” And how do you deal with that if it happens to you? I

John Simon:

Think you have an understanding with that lawyer about what’s going to happen with the case, who is going to be handling what, and you’ve got to have a good feel for not just the case, that it’s a good case, but if it’s somebody that I’m not comfortable working with, I’ll tell them to try to find somebody else.

Alvin Wolff:

Yeah. I mean, I’ve got one right now where we’ve got 24 defendants in the case and the lawyer from Florida who hired me is completely deferential to everything. In fact, a little bit too much. The 24 defendants just getting service has been a nightmare.

Christine Byers:

Interesting. Okay. Wonderful. This hot topic involves StubHub and the plaintiff in this case is claiming, the plaintiff in this case is claiming that the retailer renegs on its fan protect guarantee. And that guarantee is their way of saying, “We’ll provide comparable tickets or refund customers if the tickets aren’t available that they bought on the day of the concert.” The plaintiff in this case is claiming that less than 40 minutes before Taylor Swift’s show started, StubHub gave the tickets that were patently inferior to the ones that she bought for $14,000. Accordingly, the three tickets that she received as a replacement for the tickets that she had actually purchased were worth only about $3,600.

John Simon:

Well, I see a lot of issues. One is $14,000 for tickets.

Christine Byers:

For concert tickets.

Alvin Wolff:

So what’s the issue? She didn’t get what she paid for?

Christine Byers:

So she’s claiming that the tickets that she actually got were worth $3,600, markedly less than the 14 grand she spent. And she says based on information and belief, StubHub pocketed the difference. Do you think she has a case?

Alvin Wolff:

I think it’s Buyer Beware. If that’s listed as $14,000 on the website and you put your money down,

John Simon:

You

Alvin Wolff:

Probably ought to go to a psychiatrist and figure out when it all started to prompt you to spend 14 grand for a Taylor Swift concert.

John Simon:

Wait a minute. You just lost half of your audience. You did. You

Alvin Wolff:

Did. Hey, I like Taylor Swift. I love the new album, Confessions of a Show Girl. That’s right. Is the name of the album.

Christine Byers:

That’s right.

Alvin Wolff:

I listened to it the other day.

Christine Byers:

Wonderful. What’s your favorite song?

Alvin Wolff:

Something about Travis Kelsey, where they got engaged. I haven’t listened to it enough where I know the names of the songs, but my favorite Taylor Swift song is the one about Picture to Burn.

John Simon:

Oh. So I’m really impressed. And don’t ask me about any Taylor Swart songs when

Christine Byers:

I’m- I do. I was going to pass on that.

John Simon:

I think if somebody wants to sell you something for $14,000, whatever it is, a concert ticket and you buy it, my assessment is you bought it, and I think that’s the end of it.

Alvin Wolff:

I think the case that has more merit that I recently saw was a lady that filed the class action suit about the goldfish. The goldfish crackers?

John Simon:

Oh yeah, yeah.

Alvin Wolff:

The ad says that they’re completely natural, but they put Asorbic acid in there, which makes them not completely natural. And now there’s a raging class action suit on that.

John Simon:

I know there was a class action lawsuit against a dog food maker for that same thing. And it ended up getting certified and getting settled because it wasn’t all natural.

Alvin Wolff:

I got $36 put in my Venmo account today on a Facebook class action suit. I didn’t know I was a member of, but

John Simon:

Hey. Did you have to fill out paperwork or did they just arrange to just shoot you the money in your account?

Alvin Wolff:

I don’t know. Was it about? I don’t know. I have no idea.

Christine Byers:

I’d like to add here that StubHub charges extra fees for that security, that fan protect guarantee that she had, and also claims to promise customers a refund. And again, here the issue is the tickets she bought were worth 14 grand. The ones she got were actually worth 3,600. How

John Simon:

Was the concert? Did she enjoy it?

Christine Byers:

You know, that’s a great question. I’m sure she did, but not with the great view.

John Simon:

Man, I think that’s pretty steep. $14,000. Wow. Although there are other events that are comparable. What? SuperBowl, NBA game, depending on the game and the location.

Alvin Wolff:

Really?

John Simon:

In the seat?

Alvin Wolff:

Do you spend that kind of money?

John Simon:

No. I just know of it.

Alvin Wolff:

You can watch it on television.

John Simon:

So actually, we were in Los Angeles. We were in Los Angeles and it was a Christmas day game with the Lakers. I forget who they were playing. And we were there over Christmas. And it was my son and my son-in-law and I. And I was thinking kind of at the last minute that it was Christmas Eve. And I’m thinking, wow, the Christmas day game, we wanted to go see the game. I like watching the NBA. And the tickets that were available were like $6,000 a piece. And I watched it on TV. I wasn’t going to spend $18,000 to go to the basketball game.

Alvin Wolff:

Oh, you’re a Chiefs gate. Well, I don’t know. I just- You had a better seat watching it on TV. I did.

John Simon:

My

Alvin Wolff:

Food was better.

John Simon:

Food was better. Bathroom was cleaner. The bathroom was cleaner. But I think it was. It was about $6,000 and they weren’t on the court. They were just

Alvin Wolff:

Seats. It’s unbelievable. But you know what? I’ve been to this fear three times to see these shows and I’m spending 450 bucks for a ticket for a show, which is, to me, it’s absurd. It makes no sense. But it is the eighth wonder of the world. If you

John Simon:

Haven’t been there. I guess it’s the experience though. And it’s the experience, right? Right.

Christine Byers:

Is it worth $14,000?

John Simon:

Not in my book. It’s not. I’m going to miss that show.

Christine Byers:

For

Alvin Wolff:

Sure.

John Simon:

I’d be hard pressed to get me to go for the $3,500 tickets. I don’t know that I’d do that.

Alvin Wolff:

I got a T-shirt for the Taylor Swift tour. I had a client who got hit by a car in the Grove and she told me she was going to see Taylor Swift up in Minnesota. And I said, “Get me a T-shirt from the Eris tour.” So I have my Taylor Swift shirt right next to my Melissa Ethrich shirt. There you go. Sounds good.

Christine Byers:

Sounds good. Thank you, gentlemen. Time now to turn to our email inbox for the cases our viewers have sent in for the case doctors to diagnose. Now, just so everyone knows, we’re not going to reveal where these cases came from. We’re not going to name any names or firms to protect the confidentiality of the cases. Instead, the case doctors are going to focus on just the issue in each of them. So as they say, the case doctors will see you now. This is from a commercial litigator in Colorado. My client insisted on paying my retainer in Bitcoin. Two weeks later, they claimed their wallet was hacked and filed a police report. They’re demanding I return the funds which were already converted to USD. What is my ethical exposure here if I accepted the payment in good faith?

Alvin Wolff:

Well, if you’re paid advance, an advance retainer, that money’s supposed to go into your client trust account and you’re supposed to get paid as you earn your fee. You just don’t take the money and keep the whole thing unless it’s a non-refundable retainer. That’s my understanding. Yeah. I’m

John Simon:

In mine too.

Christine Byers:

This is from a commercial litigator in Colorado. My client insisted on paying my retainer in Bitcoin. Two weeks later, they claimed their wallet was hacked and filed a police report. They’re demanding I return the funds which were already converted to USD. What is my ethical exposure here if I accepted the payment in good faith?

Alvin Wolff:

Well, if you’re paid advance, an advance retainer, that money’s supposed to go into your client trust account and you’re supposed to get paid as you earn your fee. You just don’t take the money and keep the whole thing unless it’s a non-refundable retainer. That’s my understanding.

John Simon:

Yeah. I mean mine too. I guess it’s going to depend on how far they are into the case and what the retainer was for.

Alvin Wolff:

And

John Simon:

What the contract

Alvin Wolff:

Says.

John Simon:

Yeah, what the contract says. If they’re paid a $50,000 retainer and that’s so that they’re going to take the case through trial, I think some of that money needs to be refunded. On the other hand, if somebody says, “Look, I’m going to need five grand upfront to do any kind of investigation and it’s non-refundable.” I mean, I can’t imagine any attorney having a contract where they take a retainer and it’s not spelled out in their written contract, how that’s going to be handled.

Alvin Wolff:

My feeling is if you’ve done a little bit of work on the case and the client wants their money back, give them their money back because it’s not worth the aggravation. I agree. Here’s your money. That is good advice.

Christine Byers:

Our next email inbox case comes from a real estate attorney in Georgia.

Alvin Wolff:

We’re experts at that.

Christine Byers:

Ah, yes.

Alvin Wolff:

Georgia real estate law, you bet.

Christine Byers:

A homeowner placed over 200 garden gnomes in their front yard, claiming it’s an art installation. The HOA is finding them daily for unsightly clutter. The homeowners say it’s a First Amendment expression issue. Does aesthetic regulation by an HOA ever cross into constitutional territory or is it strictly a matter of contract enforcement?

Alvin Wolff:

I think it does. And are they religious artifacts? They might be from the master’s tournament, master’s nomes. If it’s in Georgia. Political.

John Simon:

Yeah. Yeah. If they’re political objects, you may have a little better ground to argue that. I remember there was a case with one of the municipalities here, it was Ladue where it was a political sign and they banned them, right? Right. And that went on for years. The plaintiff, the

Alvin Wolff:

Homeowner won.

John Simon:

Is that right? So you couldn’t put the sign out?

Alvin Wolff:

Margaret Julio was her name.

John Simon:

So I don’t know. Those kind of cases, the first question I ask from a practical standpoint is a practical perspective is what’s the big deal? I mean, really you’re going to file a lawsuit and litigate over this and spend God knows how much about putting some decorative items in somebody’s yard.

Alvin Wolff:

A lot of these homeowners covenants have restrictions like we can’t put up. I think we can put up signs that we have contractors working in our house

John Simon:

Or

Alvin Wolff:

Roofing company or-

John Simon:

Advertisements. Right.

Alvin Wolff:

Right. So who knows? I mean, maybe they could compromise and have 50 gnomes and everyone would be happy.

John Simon:

They could call it the 50 Nome rule.

Christine Byers:

Okay, gentlemen, that will do it for this episode of The Case Doctors. If you have a case that you would like the Case Doctors to dissect, send us an email at [email protected]. And here’s a QR code that will take you directly to our contact page. Once again, we will be keeping all names and cases confidential. Thank you for joining us and we will see you next time on The Case Doctors.