PHILADELPHIA – A six-figure financial dispute between collectors of rare “Magic: The Gathering” playing cards that is centered on fraud accusations is heading to trial next month in a Philadelphia federal court.
Per a Feb. 25 scheduling order from U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Judge Joel H. Slomsky, the action is listed for trial on July 20 and counsel for both parties filed pre-trial motions on June 15.
Michael Ruggiero of Morganville, N.J., first filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on July 20, 2018, versus Brian Nocenti of Kennett Square and a John Doe, alleging that they breached their duty of good faith and fair dealings.
Ruggiero argued that on May 29, 2018, he suffered from significant financial loss and the loss of irreplaceable collection of “Magic: The Gathering” playing cards, as a result of the wrongful conduct of the defendant.
Ruggiero alleged Nocenti agreed to sell his rare card collection at a total contract price of $177,415 payable in three years, with request for $70,000 due on the first year.
The plaintiff further alleged that the defendant schemed to sell the cards at a higher price to another buyer even though they had a valid contract, according to the complaint.
In so doing, Ruggiero alleged that Nocenti both reneged on the contract and refunded the plaintiff the amount of $40,000 that he had paid to date.
The plaintiff holds Nocenti and Doe responsible, because the defendants allegedly caused plaintiff to sell his own irreplaceable collection to finance the agreement.
Further, the defendant alleged that the plaintiff failed to meet the timeline to pay $70,000, despite evidence of exchange of messages with defendant confirming June 26, 2018 as the deadline for initial payment, according to the complaint.
Last fall, Nocenti filed a motion for summary judgment – claiming Ruggiero was mistaken in thinking there was a contract for him to buy Nocenti’s cards for $177,415, while Ruggiero responded with a counter-claim that a contract had indeed been agreed upon for the sale of the cards.
Each party filed pre-trial briefs on June 15, and Ruggiero’s was the first to be submitted.
“Here, a valid contract existed because there was an offer to sell the subject Magic cards, acceptance of the offer, and consideration ($40,000 paid to Mr. Nocenti over the first 11 months). Mr. Nocenti breached the parties’ contract when he reneged on May 29, 2018,” Ruggiero’s pre-trial brief stated, in part.
“A breach of contract action involves (1) The existence of a contract, (2) A breach of a duty imposed by the contract, and (3) Damages. Here, a valid bilateral contract existed to sell the subject cards for $177,415, with $70,000 to be paid by June 26, 2018, and some cards to be delivered to Mr. Ruggiero after $30,000 was paid. Mr. Nocenti reneged on this contract.”
Between allegations of breach of contract and promissory estoppel, Ruggiero claims he has been financially damaged in the amount of $218,895.
Nocenti’s pre-trial brief offers a different version of events.
“Plaintiff never paid for the cards in full nor committed to do so by any point in time. The parties discussed, but never established, a payment schedule. Rather, plaintiff preferred to keep his options open, including the ability to purchase cards from persons other than defendant,” Nocenti’s pre-trial brief read.
“Nonetheless, he assured defendant that paying defendant would be his ‘first priority’ and that ‘as soon as [plaintiff had] money to send defendant’s way, that is what will happen.’ In reliance upon these assurances, defendant held certain cards aside for plaintiff for approximately one year, but plaintiff never followed through. Rather, he only made a series of small, sporadic payments while purchasing cards from others.”
Nocenti alleges Ruggiero never attempted to make payment in full for the cards.
The plaintiff claims breach of contract, fraud and unjust enrichment, and seeks to enforce the terms of the original contract and purchase the one-of-a-kind collection.
The plaintiff is represented by Alexandra S. Jacobs, Michael Justin Fekete and John J. Levy of Montgomery McCracken Walker & Rhoads, in Cherry Hill, N.J.
The defendants are represented by Christopher James Amentas of Armstrong & Carosella, in West Chester.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:18-cv-03047
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com