Whats Wrong with America: He sold a $40 printer, then sued for $30,000


Another PHONY immigrant comes to the US and makes a living off PHONY lawsuits. Send the MoFo back where he came from and change our legal system where this stuff RARELY happens like in MOST countries: The LOSER PAYS all court and incurred costs…

He sold a $40 printer. Then he was sued in Indiana for $30,000.
[FONT=Arial]Ever sell anything used online? You may not want to after this story. Wochit


[FONT=arial](Photo: Provided by Doug Costello)

Selling a used, black-and-white printer through Craigslist seemed simple and straightforward to Doug Costello.
It wasn’t.
What the 66-year-old Massachusetts man didn’t know then is that he would spend the next 6 ½ years embroiled in a complicated and confusing legal dispute in Indiana over that printer, which, according to its buyer, was broken.
He would find himself liable for about $30,000 in damages. He would pay a lawyer at least $12,000 in his battle to escape the legal mess.
And it all started with a piece of hardware he sold online for about $40 in 2009. With shipping and other costs, the total was less than $75, according to court records.
The printer’s buyer was Gersh Zavodnik, a 54-year-old Indianapolis man known to many in the legal community as a frequent lawsuit filer who also represents himself in court. The Indiana Supreme Court said the “prolific, abusive litigant” has brought dozens of lawsuits against individuals and businesses, often asking for astronomical damages. Most, according to court records, involve online sales and transactions.
Zavodnik, a native of Ukraine who moved to the United States in 1987 under a grant of political asylum, sued Costello, accusing him of falsely advertising a malfunctioning printer with missing parts, and pocketing Zavodnik’s money. According to a complaint filed in Marion Superior Court, Zavodnik tried to resolve the issue with Costello to no avail, leaving him with no other choice but to take legal action.
Zavodnik declined to speak with IndyStar. In an earlier interview, he said his motivation for filing lawsuits is simple: to seek justice from people who, he said, stole money from him.
According to court records, Zavodnik initially filed a lawsuit in Marion County Small Claims Court, where he asked for the maximum damages of $6,000. Zavodnik lost because he had thrown away the evidence (the printer), court records said.
Costello said he thought that was the end of the legal fight, but Zavodnik filed another lawsuit in Marion Superior Court, where he requested damages for breach of contract, fraud, conversion, deceptive advertising and emotional distress.
“I figured that’s it,” Costello said of his victory in small claims court. "But no, no, no. Now I’m in another twilight zone."
In 2010, Zavodnik sent Costello, who also was representing himself in the lawsuit, paperwork asking him to admit that he was liable for more than $30,000 for breach of contract, fraud and conversion. The trial court dismissed the case, along with 26 others filed by Zavodnik, who appealed all of those dismissals, court records state.
The Indiana Court of Appeals in March 2012 revived the lawsuit against Costello and sent the case back to the trial court, where it remained stagnant for another nine months until a hearing was scheduled later that year.
Zavodnik also had sent Costello two more requests for admissions. One asked Costello to admit that he conspired with the judge presiding over the case, and that he was liable for more than $300,000. Another one requested Costello to admit that he was liable for more than $600,000.

Read the rest: He sold a $40 printer. Then he was sued in Indiana for $30,000.


In America you can sue anyone for anything. Prisoners sue because they can’t watch the TV show they want. Think about that for a minute. They are in prison & can sue because they don’t get to watch the TV show they want to. They have also sued because they don’t like the food they are served. Oh & of course there’s no reason not to sue because you don’t lose even if you lose.
It’s my believe that legal costs have resulted in a huge percentage of the increases of our health care. Insurance companies will often settle out of court simply because it costs less to settle than it does to go to court & win. And God forbid a jury awards damages to the little guy in a suit against a drug company or doctor, that’s almost always millions (or so it seems).


That is the problem, you don’t lose anything if you sue and lose the case. Most countries loser pays all costs and that brings the stuff to a halt…


**That is the problem, you don’t lose anything if you sue and lose the case. Most countries loser pays all costs and that brings the stuff to a halt… **
You said it Don. Our laws should be changed but the little guys could never sue the big companies. I don’t know what to do about it but I do know that something needs to be done.
What is that old saying…Something line 99% of lawyers give 1% of them a bad name.


The other part of it is, if you have nothing, you have nothing to lose.

His problem was he HAD assets; and he didn’t have a personal-liability insurance policy; and he tried to sell garbage on Craigslist to strangers.

He was basically a babe in the woods there. He had assets and people today have no morals or integrity.

Make SURE, if you do something like this, you either have some sort of personal-liability protection or you use a front - someone very broke who does it for you, who has nothing that can be attached.


The real problem is our Judicial system that encourages this type of Judicial tyranny, they allow innocent citizens to be bankrupted in legal fees defending themselves for simply practicing their Rights as citizens; start putting Judges in jail and this crap will disappear pretty quickly.


Clearly a vexatious lawsuit. Even if he somehow won a judgement he would lose on appeal. Courts need to go after him for constant waste of resources.


There is a legal term I once heard on one of those TV judge shows about these types of individuals who sue for any thing and everything. The term says they are not longer allowed to sue people.