Facts

The bank loaned money to an individual, in part based on the collateral of two classic automobiles and appraisals done on Auto Appraisal Network letterhead. Defendant Jeffrey Hyman did the written appraisal for these cars in April 2009.

A year and a half later, the customer defaulted on the loan and the cars were reappraised for their value. The bank's expert noted that both cars were clones, and therefore worth substantially less than the amounts stated in the 2009 appraisals. The cars were subsequently sold off. The bank sued Auto Appraisal Network and Jeffrey Hyman for the amount of the loan to its customer.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The bank contended that both Hyman and Auto Appraisal Network were one and the same, and that the 2009 appraisals negligently misrepresented the cars as genuine, when in fact they were clones.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Auto Appraisal Network Inc. claimed it was a separate entity from a dba of Auto Appraisal Network, which was being used by Hyman.

Damages

The bank claimed $192,000 in damages.

Result

Defense verdict. The jury found no false representation had been made by Hyman in the 2009 appraisals.

Other Information

Defendant Jeffrey Hyman is in pro per. EXPERT TESTIMONY: Joseph Salgueiro testified that the vehicles were not originals but instead were clones. The value in 2010 at the time he evaluated the cars was significantly lower than the value given by Hyman in April 2009. Dennis Mitosinka testified that the value of the cars was higher in 2010 than the estimate of plaintiff's expert.

Length

four days