Can the Courts be Used to Settle a Score?
The case of Russell vs Anderson
represents a rare opportunity for the string instrument world to observe
the end game in the sorts of legal disputes that can arise around
authenticity of fine art objects. The results of the trial which concluded
in September are a matter of public record, and the full, verbatim copy of
the judgment entered into may be found here.
The facts leading up to the judgment are as follows:
In the summer of 2000, Kristina Anderson entered into a two year contract
with Raymond Russell and George Woodall to purchase a violin,
described and certified by Harry Duffy, the veteran dealer, as
a J. B. Guadagnini . The total price of the violin was $260,000.00. Ms.
Anderson made an initial down payment of fifty thousand dollars, but she
was late in making a subsequent payment, which caused Raymond Russell and
George Woodall to demand the return of the violin.
Ms Anderson did not return the violin, and continued to make the payments,
but apparently not fast enough for the seller. At this point Russell and
Woodall hired attorney Bernd Schmidt to file suit to reclaim the violin.
Anderson hired Christopher Smith, a Santa Cruz attorney to represent her.
Anderson also contacted various people in the trade to research her
situation and develop some recourse: Roland Feller, Kenway Lee, Jay Ifshin,
Joseph Grubaugh, all from the San Francisco Bay Area, Christopher Reuning
the Boston dealer, Stefan Hersh of Hersh Consulting in Illinois, James
Warren of Kenneth Warren and Son in Chicago and Robert Bein of Bein and
Fushi, also in Chicago were all approached for advice and help. As
Anderson researched her situation she discovered that serious questions of
authenticity had been raised about the violin prior to her contracting to
purchase it. It was exposed that Christopher Reuning had taken the violin
to the eminent London expert, Charles Beare in an effort to establish its
authenticity so that he might offer the violin on consignment. As well as
Beare, Mr. Reuning showed the violin to a number of other knowledgeable
colleagues, and the conclusion reached was that the violin was a
composite instrument, with only the front of the violin being an original
Guadagnini. When Reuning returned the violin to Raymond Russell in March
of 2000 he told Russell of the unhappy revelations regarding the
instrument.
Russell apparently chose to disregard the information which Reuning had
given him (he denied he had been given it,) and subsequently entered into the contract with Anderson. Once
Anderson became aware of the extent of the negative issues around the
violin she and her attorney decided to counter-sue Russell on the grounds
of Misrepresentation. Both parties aggressively sued for
damages, as opposed to the rescission of the original contract. The trial
itself saw Christopher Reuning serving as the material witness for Anderson's
side of the case and Harry Duffy as the witness for Russell's side.
Although all of the witnesses other than Mr. Duffy had expressed doubts
about the violin, the actual testimony which was weighed by the court
centered on these two. When Mr. Reuning was asked to represent the opinion of Charles Beare
regarding the violin's authenticity, the plaintiffs' attorney objected on
grounds the evidence was hearsay. Since Reuning acknowledged that while he
had initially noticed the inconsistencies with Guadagnini's work, and he agreed with the Beare opinion, he had not come to
that opinion entirely independently, the
Court sustained the objection.
The
decision of the Court to let the contract stand, and to award no damages
cannot have pleased either side fully, and the
suit must seem a costly and time-consuming exercise for what it yielded. How then might this case have been
resolved differently?
1.) If Anderson's side of the case had challenged witness Duffy with
Charles Beare himself, or in his stead, any other witnesses who, on their
own authority, would not support the authenticity of the violin.
2.) If either side sought simply the rescission of the sale, as opposed to
seeking damages. ###
Melanie Hersh
Melanie
Hersh is the editor and webmaster of Soundpost Online