Klarinet Archive - Posting 000320.txt from 2000/11

From: "Kevin Fay (LCA)" <kevinfay@-----.com>
Subj: RE: [kl] Final Chapter, Stolen Bass Clarinet
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 14:59:22 -0500

Roger Garrett posted:

<<<My guess is that he [that would be "Jim"] will not sue anyone (who would
he sue?). Defamation and slander cases are hard to win - you have to be
able to show damages. What are his damages? How will he prove them?>>>

It would be easy for Jim to sue David for defamation -- either libel (for
written/published statements) or slander (for spoken communications,
including those over a telephone). Anyone can sue anyone for almost
anything -- it's just a matter of writing up a complaint and submitting it
to the court with the filing fee. Fortunately, winning would be tougher. I
don't recall David ever saying that Jim was the thief, only that the
clarinet was stolen and that Jim had, in David's opinion, less-than-stellar
morals. Statements of opinion aren't ironclad, but liability from stating
them unusual. A showing of damages would be difficult as well; while David
did publish his identity (or at least enough facts like email & telephone
through which his identity could be ascertained), Jim's standing in the
community probably hasn't been damaged, at least in a way easily monetized.

That's not Jim's only possible cause of action, though. If Jim can prove
that David's actions cost him money -- i.e., that he got less for the sale
of the horn than he would have absent the campaign -- then David could
theoretically be liable to him for the difference under a "tortious
interference" theory. Proving such a case is tough, as it requires
significant economic analysis. It's done all the time as the grist of many
commercial lawsuits, but it's not very likely to happen for the amount of
damages here, if indeed there even are any. You do see strange things in
small claims court, however, so who knows? Of course, to bring such a suit,
Jim would have to establish that he was indeed the legal owner of the
clarinet.

<<<It's a free world - people can say what they want as long as it is
true.>>>

Not entirely true as a legal matter -- there's a tort known as "false light"
where it's possible to be liable for digging up little factoids of someone
else's past etc. -- but true enough here.

<<<But it never hurts to have a PLUP policy as part of your insurance!!!!>>>

. . . which gets us to the point here. I assume that Roger is referring to
"replacement value" insurance, where the insurer will pay you not the value
of the loss, but the value to *replace* the loss. If you have a homeowner's
or renter's policy in place, I strongly urge you to buy the rider. In the
long run the extra premium is cheap. If you make your living with your
instruments, moreover, it may be vital for you to be covered at all. Many
times the insurer will take the position that equipment that has been fully
amortized has zero worth; unless you are insured for replacement value, the
amount of your settlement can be pitifully small.

One more tidbit. Greg Smith inscribes serial numbers on his mouthpieces;
kudos to him. Having serial numbers helps insurability a great deal.
Having the serial numbers of all of your instruments in a safe place will
help with both insurance companies and police reports. My insurance agent
recommended going though your stuff with a video camera -- you always forget
the accessories, and the cost adds up.

kjf

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org