Inside the Legal Storm Threatening the Third-Party Card Grading Empire

Editorial note: This article reports allegations in pending civil complaints, not proven facts or legal conclusions. Docket status, service tiers, and prices can change. We link the underlying records so readers can check the current source.

Two pending federal actions challenge parts of the card-grading business operated by Professional Sports Authenticator (PSA) and its parent, Collectors Holdings. The cases raise different legal theories: one complaint asserts civil RICO and related consumer claims, while another alleges anticompetitive consolidation.

The claims described below are the plaintiffs' allegations. Unless stated otherwise, no court has made a final finding that those allegations are true.

---

1. The civil RICO complaint: Funk v. Collectors Universe

Nicholas Funk filed Funk v. Collectors Universe, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:26-cv-02933, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland on July 28, 2026. The primary source for this section is the filed complaint preserved by CourtListener.

The complaint asserts claims under the federal civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1962, as well as other federal and state-law theories.

What the complaint alleges

The complaint defines a proposed class of collectors who submitted cards through third-party intermediaries. It argues that those collectors did not directly accept PSA's online arbitration terms. That is the plaintiff's procedural theory; the court has not ruled that the proposed class can proceed on that basis.

The complaint also challenges PSA's grading consistency, use of value-based service tiers, and treatment of altered cards. Its assertions about grader quotas, resubmitted cards, "population control," and the T206 Honus Wagner known as the "Gretzky Wagner" are allegations in the filing, not independent findings by Sports Card Hustle.

Readers can compare the complaint's grading allegations with PSA's current official grading standards. PSA's current service tiers and declared-value rules are published on its official trading-card grading page.

---

2. The antitrust action: Rasmussen v. Collectors Holdings

Collectors Holdings is also defending Rasmussen et al. v. Collectors Holdings, Inc. et al., Case No. 8:26-cv-00897, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Readers can check the parties and current docket status through the public docket listing and the federal judiciary's PACER Case Locator.

The action invokes Section 7 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 18, and Section 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2.

Market-share and pricing claims

The market-share percentages attributed to PSA, SGC, Beckett, and CGC are estimates cited by the plaintiffs. They are not audited figures or judicial findings. The alleged competitive effects of Collectors' acquisitions likewise remain disputed issues for the court.

The complaint also describes changes to grading prices, turnaround times, staffing, volume, and service-tier availability. Those historical assertions should be read in the context of the litigation. For current customer terms, use the graders' own pages:

• PSA trading-card grading services
• SGC services and pricing
• Beckett grading services

Do not use an old article or complaint as a current price sheet.

---

3. What collectors should take from pending litigation

Pending complaints can identify issues worth watching, but they do not establish liability. Collectors should distinguish among:

1. An allegation in a complaint: one party's account of facts and law.
2. A procedural order: a ruling about how a case moves forward, which may not decide the merits.
3. A final judgment or settlement: an outcome that may resolve some or all claims.

For submission decisions today, compare each grader's current written standards, declared-value rules, turnaround estimates, insurance terms, and dispute process. For the lawsuits, consult the live docket rather than relying on a fixed hearing date or an old procedural summary.

For a practical comparison of the major grading services, read our PSA vs. BGS vs. SGC grading guide. If grading is part of a sale decision, first check what your sports cards are worth, then submit the collection for consignment review if you would rather have us handle the selling process.

Sources and update record

• Filed Funk complaint (CourtListener RECAP PDF)
• Public Rasmussen docket listing and PACER Case Locator
• 18 U.S.C. § 1962, 15 U.S.C. § 18, and 15 U.S.C. § 2
• PSA grading standards and service tiers

Last source review: August 29, 2026. Recheck scheduled within 90 days, or sooner after a material docket filing.