We live in a very litigious society. Most people will at one time or another will have stopped on the dial of one of the many “courtroom T.V.” shows and had a good laugh at the guy who is suing a neighbor. Often they involve claims like asking $250,000.00 for the pain and suffering he experiences every time the neighbor’s four-year old lets the Frisbee fly over the fence. In any number of cases, someone will have brought in as an “expert” to verify why something is the way it is. It is usually equally as laughable. Unfortunately, this is where courtroom television meets the hobby, and if you are involved, it is no laughing matter.

The intent of this article is not to say that someone or anyone in particular is or is not an expert. I am not a lawyer and have almost no formal training in law. What I am trying to do is provide some language and context for use. To begin with, we need to decide just what makes someone an expert. According to the Federal Rules of Evidence, specifically Rule #702, states:

Rule 702. Testimony by Experts

If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.

For this to have any applicability and to make any sense, let’s pick this apart and see what makes sense for the hobby. To begin with, I think that we may all want to agree that anyone who has a question about an item can be considered a “trier of fact” to some degree. All I am saying here is if everyone all had the same level of understanding, experience, reference data/material, and techniques, then it would not be an issue. The plan fact of the matter is that somebody out there knows more about something than you do, hence the desire for an “experts” opinion.

Before I begin to look at the particulars of what Rule 702 requires of experts, I must make something very clear. In cases where a person has paid for an opinion on an item, I think the results of that opinion are between the person who paid for the opinion and the one who provided it. If you are a third party, there is nothing wrong with asking for some of the information used to substantiate the opinion, but you are not entitled to it. I am not trying to draw a veil of secrecy around the process, but you should not expect to get for free what someone else has paid for.

A possible exception to this exists with the realm of the auction world. Most auction houses incur some cost, either or internal, to the evaluation of their items. If you are a prospective bidder, then you should expect access to this information before you bid as you are in the “trier of fact” mode. I would suggest that after the auction, that information belongs to the auction house, the person providing the opinion, and the winning bidder.

Understanding and Applying the Definition

Like most things in life, application requires an understanding of the context in which they are used or evaluated. I would offer this framework for using the language in Rule #702.

(1) The testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data. For the hobby, I think we are all agreeable that the “because I said so” is a rather weak argument. We did not like hearing this as kids, and certainly like it even less when we are being asked to buy something based on that as a rational. We should expect that any opinion that is based on any number of facts or data points:

a. How does this compare with other know examples and what those examples are? For instance when someone states “All Correct Tagging,” what is the basis for stating this?

b. If photographic references are made, are the photographs included? If not, where I do reasonably go to see this for myself? This goes back to the point I made about what a person is entitled to. In cases where an authenticator has paid for research time and photographic reproductions, as is often the case with the National Baseball Hall of Fame Research Center, what you should be entitled to is know where and how you can obtain those same photographs versus copies of the photos themselves. In other cases it may be nothing more than providing you with the title and page a photograph can found.

Other reasonable questions or issues that should be addressed when considering whether the facts and data are sufficient may include:

a. How long has the person been involved in this particular aspect of the hobby?

b. An approximate number of like items the person has seen.

c. Do they have any special or formalized training or experience in related fields such as imagery analysis, manufacturer of the item, or as a researcher?

d. Have they published any works in the associated field that have held up to the public scrutiny of the hobby?

While this is not meant to be the all-inclusive list of qualifications, I would think it would begin to address the basics.

(2) The testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods. For me, this means the person has and uses an established process that makes sense given what they are being asked to look at. This process should be expected to be made public in the form of “this is what I look for and this is how I do it.” I am not advocating that all of the reference data be made available since much of this has been accumulated at both the time and personal expense of the person offering the opinion. Once again, this goes back to the point I made earlier, if you are a potential buyer or the owner of the item that you have paid for to have authenticated, then you are entitled to it.

The concept I would like to emphasize centers on the word reliable. This should mean that if you do the same things in the same manner with the same information, you should get the same results, or in this case, opinion.

(3) The witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case. In this case, the witness is the person offering the opinion. All this is saying that the process, principles, and methods used served as the basis for the opinion, not the other way around. By this I mean, if the person’s methods or procedures call for use of photographs for comparison, they cannot simply choose not to do this because some of the photographs contradict their opinion. In addition if they evidence that supports more than one possibility, they should state what both are and then clarify why they believe it to be on case over another.

The value of sports memorabilia is often driven by some sort of number. The jersey from base hit #4192, the bat from home run #500, the ball from strikeout #300. The one thing that all of these have in common in relation to real value should be some measured application of #702. I for one don’t want to be the guy standing before Judge Judy and asking her to take my side simply because I said so.

We live in a very litigious society. Most people will at one time or another will have stopped on the dial of one of the many “courtroom T.V.” shows and had a good laugh at the guy who is suing a neighbor. Often they involve claims like asking $250,000.00 for the pain and suffering he experiences every time the neighbor’s four-year old lets the Frisbee fly over the fence. In any number of cases, someone will have brought in as an “expert” to verify why something is the way it is. It is usually equally as laughable. Unfortunately, this is where courtroom television meets the hobby, and if you are involved, it is no laughing matter.

The intent of this article is not to say that someone or anyone in particular is or is not an expert. I am not a lawyer and have almost no formal training in law. What I am trying to do is provide some language and context for use. To begin with, we need to decide just what makes someone an expert. According to the Federal Rules of Evidence, specifically Rule #702, states:

Rule 702. Testimony by Experts

If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.

For this to have any applicability and to make any sense, let’s pick this apart and see what makes sense for the hobby. To begin with, I think that we may all want to agree that anyone who has a question about an item can be considered a “trier of fact” to some degree. All I am saying here is if everyone all had the same level of understanding, experience, reference data/material, and techniques, then it would not be an issue. The plan fact of the matter is that somebody out there knows more about something than you do, hence the desire for an “experts” opinion.

Before I begin to look at the particulars of what Rule 702 requires of experts, I must make something very clear. In cases where a person has paid for an opinion on an item, I think the results of that opinion are between the person who paid for the opinion and the one who provided it. If you are a third party, there is nothing wrong with asking for some of the information used to substantiate the opinion, but you are not entitled to it. I am not trying to draw a veil of secrecy around the process, but you should not expect to get for free what someone else has paid for.

A possible exception to this exists with the realm of the auction world. Most auction houses incur some cost, either or internal, to the evaluation of their items. If you are a prospective bidder, then you should expect access to this information before you bid as you are in the “trier of fact” mode. I would suggest that after the auction, that information belongs to the auction house, the person providing the opinion, and the winning bidder.

Understanding and Applying the Definition

Like most things in life, application requires an understanding of the context in which they are used or evaluated. I would offer this framework for using the language in Rule #702.

(1) The testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data. For the hobby, I think we are all agreeable that the “because I said so” is a rather weak argument. We did not like hearing this as kids, and certainly like it even less when we are being asked to buy something based on that as a rational. We should expect that any opinion that is based on any number of facts or data points:

a. How does this compare with other know examples and what those examples are? For instance when someone states “All Correct Tagging,” what is the basis for stating this?

b. If photographic references are made, are the photographs included? If not, where I do reasonably go to see this for myself? This goes back to the point I made about what a person is entitled to. In cases where an authenticator has paid for research time and photographic reproductions, as is often the case with the National Baseball Hall of Fame Research Center, what you should be entitled to is know where and how you can obtain those same photographs versus copies of the photos themselves. In other cases it may be nothing more than providing you with the title and page a photograph can found.

Other reasonable questions or issues that should be addressed when considering whether the facts and data are sufficient may include:

a. How long has the person been involved in this particular aspect of the hobby?

b. An approximate number of like items the person has seen.

c. Do they have any special or formalized training or experience in related fields such as imagery analysis, manufacturer of the item, or as a researcher?

d. Have they published any works in the associated field that have held up to the public scrutiny of the hobby?

While this is not meant to be the all-inclusive list of qualifications, I would think it would begin to address the basics.

(2) The testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods. For me, this means the person has and uses an established process that makes sense given what they are being asked to look at. This process should be expected to be made public in the form of “this is what I look for and this is how I do it.” I am not advocating that all of the reference data be made available since much of this has been accumulated at both the time and personal expense of the person offering the opinion. Once again, this goes back to the point I made earlier, if you are a potential buyer or the owner of the item that you have paid for to have authenticated, then you are entitled to it.

The concept I would like to emphasize centers on the word reliable. This should mean that if you do the same things in the same manner with the same information, you should get the same results, or in this case, opinion.

(3) The witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case. In this case, the witness is the person offering the opinion. All this is saying that the process, principles, and methods used served as the basis for the opinion, not the other way around. By this I mean, if the person’s methods or procedures call for use of photographs for comparison, they cannot simply choose not to do this because some of the photographs contradict their opinion. In addition if they evidence that supports more than one possibility, they should state what both are and then clarify why they believe it to be on case over another.

The value of sports memorabilia is often driven by some sort of number. The jersey from base hit #4192, the bat from home run #500, the ball from strikeout #300. The one thing that all of these have in common in relation to real value should be some measured application of #702. I for one don’t want to be the guy standing before Judge Judy and asking her to take my side simply because I said so.

If you have ever been a writer with a regular deadline, this may ring all to true with you…what do you do when you run out of ideas? For me, this does happen from time to time. In some cases, stories seem to come to front door…Literally, as was the case with the past two weeks with the Ruth bat and the Clemente jersey. Other times, and this is certainly one of them, I find myself engaged in something at work and the idea for a column comes. One of the things I am working on is the larger training and education of the Intel Workforce. This is a combination of job specific skills and broader concepts for professional development….Don’t worry, I’m getting there.

Another topic I have written about but won’t rehash at this time, is the need for a professional association. The natural outgrowth, at least to me, would be how to address this within the concept of professional development and growth for the hobby/industry. Welcome to Sports Memorabilia University (SMU).

The question is… what would be the course work requirements for someone who wanted to earn a degree or professional certification in the field of Memorabilia Evaluations? I decided it might be worth while to attempt to describe the courses that, as Dean of SMU, I would want to see my students take. Although all of this may sound silly and some may see it as nothing more than me looking for weekly filler for my column, I would ask you to give some serious thoughts to the subjects I propose as well as the value they have with respect to the expectations the hobby/industry has for people working in this field.

CORE Courses:

Computer Applications: Students gain a basic understanding and knowledge of word processing, spreadsheet, database, and graphic applications. Students learn to use the Microsoft Office Suite Software package. Other focus area’s include the use of the internet and search engines.

Research Methods: This course is intended to provide students with the necessary information, skills and practice in research methodology to enable them to undertake a small research project from inception to completion. Focus areas include hypothesis forming and testing and the identification and use of primary and secondary reference material. Students will develop and work from an established set of procedures that is both consistent and comprehensive in practical exercises.

Critical Thinking, and Reasoning: This course will focus on developing critical thinking and reasoning patterns for use by the student to more effectively express his or her viewpoint, to better identify and rebut faulty logic, and to aid in the logical presentation of ideas. Emphasis will be placed on everyday situations encountered in the hobby/industry.

Imagery Analysis: Student will learn the fundamentals of imagery analysis through the study and demonstrated application of all three categories of image utilization.
Category One: Photographic Reference. This involves using the image as a source of information.
Category Two: Photographic Comparison. This involves using the image to compare with either another image or an actual object.
Category Three: Photographic Extrapolation. Focus on mensuration or using an object of known size to ascertain information about other objects in a picture.

1 of the Following History Courses:
History of Baseball
History of Football
History of Basketball
History of Hockey
Student will trace the evolution of the game with a focus changes of the implements of play and their significance to the game and the hobby/industry today.

The History of Sports Equipment Manufacturing and Marketing: Students will study the history of both the major and minor manufacturers of sporting goods with focus on manufacturing techniques, technologies, means of product identification and marketing.

Business and Personal Ethics: A theoretical critique and case-oriented analysis of the moral, ethical, and value issues that challenge hobby/industry related business with a view toward discovering ethical principles and strategies applicable to the process of performing evaluations.

Understanding Use and Wear: Students will study the effects of use and wear relative to various sports and time frames in order to gain an appreciation for making informed and consistent determinations with respect to degree and legitimacy

.

Building a Research Library: Pre-requisite Research Methods and Computer Applications. Students will learn both the value and use of as well and various techniques for assembling a research library. Course work will involve selecting a topic and using a notional budget of $500.00, assemble a Library. Students will be required to establish a searchable data base for this library and offer a presentation describing both the process used and the particular value these holding have to the assigned topic.

Uniform Tagging: Pre-requisite The History of Sports Equipment Manufacturing and Marketing: Students will study the evolution of manufacturers and the changes over time with respect both types and styles of tagging. Focus areas will include application, location, and understanding the concept of variations and legitimacy.

ELECTIVES Courses for Specialized Concentrations:

Bat Labeling: Students will study the concept of manufacturer’s labels and markings as it applies to the areas of dating and product quality.

Independent Study: Topic subject to pre-approval. Pre-requisites are all Core course work and Building a Research Library. Student will narrowly focus a topic on a particular team or player with an emphasis in producing a product that has value as hobby/industry reference.

Helmets: Students will study the history of protective headgear with an emphasis on identifying those items manufactured for contemporary retail sale and the problems they create for the hobby/industry.

Leather Over Time: A broad survey of leather products such as gloves, balls, and footwear and the problems associated with these items with respect to professional use and attribution.

There are a couple of reasons I took the time to lay this out and none of them have to do with meeting a deadline. For the collector, it offers some insights on what areas you may want to focus your own personal/professional development on. It also offers a template by which you can begin to evaluate the qualifications of those working in the field. While no one will be able to produce a certificate of completion for this program, you could evaluate their relative merits using these as guidelines.

Another reason I set this up as I did ties back into something I have been talking about for some time, that being the idea of running a series of seminars covering topics such as these. My goal is to work towards making something like this available in conjunction with the National next summer in Cleveland. If there is an area that you feel would be most valuable or informative, your thoughts are always more than welcome.

Finally, I think that an exercise like this is good for MEARS internally. It provides a template on how we can shape and structure our own (either individual or collective) continuing education.

Dave Grob

LTC Dave Grob can be reached for comment on this article at:
DaveGrob1@aol.com
Or

LTC Dave Grob
14218 Roland Court
Woodbridge, VA 22193

If you have ever been a writer with a regular deadline, this may ring all to true with you…what do you do when you run out of ideas? For me, this does happen from time to time. In some cases, stories seem to come to front door…Literally, as was the case with the past two weeks with the Ruth bat and the Clemente jersey. Other times, and this is certainly one of them, I find myself engaged in something at work and the idea for a column comes. One of the things I am working on is the larger training and education of the Intel Workforce. This is a combination of job specific skills and broader concepts for professional development….Don’t worry, I’m getting there.

Another topic I have written about but won’t rehash at this time, is the need for a professional association. The natural outgrowth, at least to me, would be how to address this within the concept of professional development and growth for the hobby/industry. Welcome to Sports Memorabilia University (SMU).

The question is… what would be the course work requirements for someone who wanted to earn a degree or professional certification in the field of Memorabilia Evaluations? I decided it might be worth while to attempt to describe the courses that, as Dean of SMU, I would want to see my students take. Although all of this may sound silly and some may see it as nothing more than me looking for weekly filler for my column, I would ask you to give some serious thoughts to the subjects I propose as well as the value they have with respect to the expectations the hobby/industry has for people working in this field.

CORE Courses:

Computer Applications: Students gain a basic understanding and knowledge of word processing, spreadsheet, database, and graphic applications. Students learn to use the Microsoft Office Suite Software package. Other focus area’s include the use of the internet and search engines.

Research Methods: This course is intended to provide students with the necessary information, skills and practice in research methodology to enable them to undertake a small research project from inception to completion. Focus areas include hypothesis forming and testing and the identification and use of primary and secondary reference material. Students will develop and work from an established set of procedures that is both consistent and comprehensive in practical exercises.

Critical Thinking, and Reasoning: This course will focus on developing critical thinking and reasoning patterns for use by the student to more effectively express his or her viewpoint, to better identify and rebut faulty logic, and to aid in the logical presentation of ideas. Emphasis will be placed on everyday situations encountered in the hobby/industry.

Imagery Analysis: Student will learn the fundamentals of imagery analysis through the study and demonstrated application of all three categories of image utilization.
Category One: Photographic Reference. This involves using the image as a source of information.
Category Two: Photographic Comparison. This involves using the image to compare with either another image or an actual object.
Category Three: Photographic Extrapolation. Focus on mensuration or using an object of known size to ascertain information about other objects in a picture.

1 of the Following History Courses:
History of Baseball
History of Football
History of Basketball
History of Hockey
Student will trace the evolution of the game with a focus changes of the implements of play and their significance to the game and the hobby/industry today.

The History of Sports Equipment Manufacturing and Marketing: Students will study the history of both the major and minor manufacturers of sporting goods with focus on manufacturing techniques, technologies, means of product identification and marketing.

Business and Personal Ethics: A theoretical critique and case-oriented analysis of the moral, ethical, and value issues that challenge hobby/industry related business with a view toward discovering ethical principles and strategies applicable to the process of performing evaluations.

Understanding Use and Wear: Students will study the effects of use and wear relative to various sports and time frames in order to gain an appreciation for making informed and consistent determinations with respect to degree and legitimacy

.

Building a Research Library: Pre-requisite Research Methods and Computer Applications. Students will learn both the value and use of as well and various techniques for assembling a research library. Course work will involve selecting a topic and using a notional budget of $500.00, assemble a Library. Students will be required to establish a searchable data base for this library and offer a presentation describing both the process used and the particular value these holding have to the assigned topic.

Uniform Tagging: Pre-requisite The History of Sports Equipment Manufacturing and Marketing: Students will study the evolution of manufacturers and the changes over time with respect both types and styles of tagging. Focus areas will include application, location, and understanding the concept of variations and legitimacy.

ELECTIVES Courses for Specialized Concentrations:

Bat Labeling: Students will study the concept of manufacturer’s labels and markings as it applies to the areas of dating and product quality.

Independent Study: Topic subject to pre-approval. Pre-requisites are all Core course work and Building a Research Library. Student will narrowly focus a topic on a particular team or player with an emphasis in producing a product that has value as hobby/industry reference.

Helmets: Students will study the history of protective headgear with an emphasis on identifying those items manufactured for contemporary retail sale and the problems they create for the hobby/industry.

Leather Over Time: A broad survey of leather products such as gloves, balls, and footwear and the problems associated with these items with respect to professional use and attribution.

There are a couple of reasons I took the time to lay this out and none of them have to do with meeting a deadline. For the collector, it offers some insights on what areas you may want to focus your own personal/professional development on. It also offers a template by which you can begin to evaluate the qualifications of those working in the field. While no one will be able to produce a certificate of completion for this program, you could evaluate their relative merits using these as guidelines.

Another reason I set this up as I did ties back into something I have been talking about for some time, that being the idea of running a series of seminars covering topics such as these. My goal is to work towards making something like this available in conjunction with the National next summer in Cleveland. If there is an area that you feel would be most valuable or informative, your thoughts are always more than welcome.

Finally, I think that an exercise like this is good for MEARS internally. It provides a template on how we can shape and structure our own (either individual or collective) continuing education.

Dave Grob

LTC Dave Grob can be reached for comment on this article at:
DaveGrob1@aol.com
Or

LTC Dave Grob
14218 Roland Court
Woodbridge, VA 22193