Art Law (I) United States v. Portrait of Wally 105 F. Supp 2d (SDNY 2000) (1) Facts: a museum director is selling works to the museum he is the director of, and knew the family that this painting was stolen from in WWII, then came into possession of painting and sold to his museum. (2) Issue and Hold: Should US forces recovery be treated as a recovery of property on behalf of the true owners, even through they had yet to be located, therefore the subsequent owners where receiving stolen property. (I) Fraudulent Art a. Galleries have prints that are numbered limited edition lithography’s. How do we know they are real? b. More than 10% of paintings sold as art are fraudulently named. c. FTC vs. Austin Galleries i. FTC field suit alleging defendants have repeatedly sold graphic art work that they falsely represented to be valuable limited edition, hand signed originals by artists such as Dali, Chagall, and Picasso, when in fact the prints they sold were often worthless as collectible art. ii. Parties entered into an agreed preliminary injunction order preventing defendants from fraudulently selling inexpensive reproductions of the named artists’ works as valuable signed litho’s. iii. ON TEST: What is the standard that needs to be met to get a prelim injunction: once past violations are established, only must show reasonably likely that future violations will occur. d. Balog v. Center Art Gallery, Inc (UCC case) i. Defendants content that the application for the UCC’s statute of limitations bars the plaintiff’s action and the court should therefore dismiss this case. Court finds the application of the statute urged by the defendants to be inappropriate and accordingly denies the defendants motion. ii. Facts: Plaintiff’s walking on promenade and stops in the defendant’s art galleries. A bunch of works were on display. Decided to purchase a bunch of pieces by mail that were supposed to salvador dali paintings. $36,200 was paid and certificates of authenticity were proffered. iii. Claim: P has a cause of action for breach of an express warranty uunder the UCC since by selling them fake artwork, the D breached the express warranties that are outlines in the code for the sale of non-conforming goods. iv. Federal government does not have a art laws in place. v. **Pleaintiff’s who wish to pursue claims for sale of fraudulent art must use common law of UCC, unless in NY or Michigan. vi. UCC: Paintings, prints and sculpture fall under the definition of goods.
vii. Statements used by the seller in describing his products become the “basis of the bargain” viii. Statute of Limitations: Does not begin to run until discovery of the fraud.