Klarinet Archive - Posting 000323.txt from 2000/11

From: "Mark Charette" <charette@-----.org>
Subj: Re: [kl] Final Chapter, Stolen Bass Clarinet
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 15:55:56 -0500

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Fay (LCA)" <kevinfay@-----.com
> 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?

At this point it would be very interesting, since Jim claims that the
interest in the stolen clarinet has probably driven the price higher: see

http://www.sneezy.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=30208&t=30011

Mark C.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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