The court would not recognize the GIA report from the seller
and would only allow the lab that the buyer used.She won.
I don’t know the reasoning here, but lot of variables happen in the
I didn’t see the previous post talking about the case…
It could be as simple as no one from GIA was present to testify at
the trial, and so the judge considered GIA’s report hearsay.
It could be that the attorney didn’t have a strong expert, that would
have been able to convince the judge about GIA position in the grading
When you’re in court, what you learned at GIA doesn’t often fly.
I do this type of work ( expert witness - trial consultant- litgation
support) … my experience has been that often the parties don’t want
to invest in the proper people because of the cost… well if you lose
your case - cause you had a weak expert, it usually costs a lot more.
Many times litigation is “my expert vs. yours”…
What is also interesting is when supposed “expert witnesses” think
they can take sides… They think because they work for a particular
client they have to help the client win… now there’s a sure fire
way to get impeached…
Gemology, valuation, as expert witness are three separate
educations… being an expert at one doesn’t get you the others…
http://www.diamondclearinghouse.com advanced gemological info and valuation
Does anyone know the reasoning here?? Why the GIA report was
disallowed and the seller’s report admitted as evidence?? In my GIA
course I was taught that the D-E-F calls are very difficult to make.
If I were buying a $65,000 stone I wouldn’t pay retail price for the
D color, first of all. Secondly, there are at least two color meters
now, Haske’s and the Auston, and while they may have some problems
accurately grading some stones, I would want to see a meter report as
well as a report from a lab where the stone was graded by more than
one person. The meters are evidently more accurate than people. As I
read Haske’s recent paper on this, he seems to be saying that people
can’t grade accurately to one letter, but only in a range of, say,
G-H-I. Does anyone else understand this stuff and have a comment on
the “ellipse of uncertainty”?
End of forwarded message