by Amineddoleh & Associates LLC | Jan 30, 2024 |
Nu Couché au coussin Bleu by Modigliani. Image via Artsy.
For years, the art world watched the dispute between Russian oligarch Dimitry Rybolovlev and Swiss shipper-turned-dealer Yves Bouvier. While their relationship’s start seemed fruitful and equally beneficial as it led to Rybolovlev’s acquisition of some of the most highly sought-after art treasures, the tide turned when the Russian billionaire discovered that Bouvier had been dishonest about information related to arts sales. Rybolovlev began a legal battle, engaging in scorched earth tactics to pursue claims against Bouvier in jurisdictions around the world. With allegations by a billionaire collector against one of the art world’s best known freeport owners and lavish dealers, many players in the art world were swept up in the fight.
At the heart of the dispute is whether Bouvier committed fraud and breached a fiduciary duty to Rybolovlev. The Russian collector alleges Bouvier flipped high-end artworks that he significantly marked up, although Bouvier represented to Rybolovlev that he was only making a 2% commission on the sales. In some instances, Bouvier concealed the fact that he or one of his shell companies had purchased the artwork shortly before selling it to Rybolovlev. The Russian billionaire alleges this was fraudulent. In addition, the collector argues that Bouvier breached his fiduciary duty because he was the seller, despite Rybolovlev’s belief that Bouvier was serving as his agent and advisor, not as a party with an ownership interest. Bouvier argues he was not Rybolovlev’s agent or advisor. The bounds of the relationship are not clear.
A scorned Rybolovlev filed charges about Bouvier in numerous countries. Eventually, Bouvier was arrested on criminal charges in Monaco in 2015 but was released. Equally salacious were Rybolovlev’s attempts to have authorities prosecute Bouvier, leading to claims that the Russian collector bribed law enforcement to pursue the case against Bouvier. It became known as “Monaco-gate.”
Eventually, Rybolovlev’s legal claims against Bouvier were either dismissed or settled, with the last one settled in December 2023 over claims filed in the United States. However, Rybolovlev felt wronged and thought others were complicit in supporting Bouvier’s fraud, and thus outstanding legal issues remained concerning other parties that were allegedly part of a fraud orchestrated by Bouvier. As Sotheby’s worked with Bouvier to conduct private sales to the collector, Rybolovlev sued one of the world’s leading auction houses in the Southern District of N.Y. (Accent Delight Int’l v. Sotheby’s, 18-CV-9011 (JMF) (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 21, 2023). The highly anticipated trial began during the second week of 2024. Closing arguments took place on Monday with the jury deciding the verdict in under 6 hours on Tuesday, January 30.
One of the works Rybololev purchased. Tête by Modigliani. Image via Sotheby’s.com.
WHAT WERE THE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST SOTHEBY’S?
Rybolovlev sought $377 million in damages from Sotheby’s, alleging that the famed auction house was complicit in Bouvier’s scheme. He argued that he relied on documents from Sotheby’s when making lavish purchases of blue-chip artworks. Rybolovlev alleged that Sotheby’s and Sotheby’s, Inc. (together, “Sotheby’s”) aided and abetted Bouvier in committing fraud. The complaint reads:
“Sotheby’s gave Bouvier written materials designed to induce Plaintiffs to pay inflated, fraudulent prices. After transactions, Sotheby’s lent a veneer of legitimacy and expertise to those fraudulent prices by providing Bouvier with inflated appraisals on demand. Sotheby’s intentionally omitted the sales to Bouvier from the transaction histories listed in these appraisals. In short, Sotheby’s assisted Bouvier in acquiring artworks at prices the sellers were willing to accept while helping him charge Plaintiffs fraudulently inflated prices (and concealing the actual acquisition prices from Plaintiffs).”
To successfully prove that Sotheby’s aided and abetted in the commission of fraud, Rybolovlev would have had to prove: “(1) the existence of an underlying fraud; (2) knowledge of the fraud on the part of the aider and abettor [in this case, Sotheby’s]; and (3) substantial assistance by the aider and abettor in achievement of the fraud. Many federal New York courts additionally consider whether the alleged “assistance” constitutes the proximate cause of the damage. “But-for” cause may be insufficient. See, Pension Comm. of Univ. of Montreal Pension Plan v Banc of Am. Sec., LLC, 446 F. Supp. 2d 163, 201-02 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) (“aider and abettor liability requires the injury to be a direct or reasonably foreseeable result of the conduct.”).
While Sotheby’s filings did not deny that Bouvier committed fraud, the auction house addressed allegations against it. As in any legal matter involving claims of fraud, it is a hurdle proving that someone had actual knowledge about a fraud. (This is what Ann Friedman argued in the Knoedler Gallery scandal—she claimed that she did not know that the forgeries sold through the gallery were not authentic.) As predicted, Sotheby’s denied knowledge of, and participation in, any scheme by Bouvier. As I told many reporters during the trial, I expected that Sotheby’s would not be found guilty for this reason– proving knowledge is a challenge.
On Jan. 30th, 2024, the New York jury cleared Sotheby’s of the allegations. The jury deliberated for six hours before releasing their verdict, and found in favor of Sotheby’s on four claims. This has the potential to put an end to the decade-long battle that stems from activity between Rybolovlev and Bouvier.
WHY WAS THIS CASE SO IMPORTANT?
The allegations in this case were not that particularly shocking because accusations of fraud are common, especially because fraud often occurs in the market. The art market is full of forgeries, price-escalation schemes, unnamed middlemen, collectors who do not conduct due diligence, and parties that do not disclose their interests in artworks for sale. But what is special about this case is that the public gets a glimpse into the rarefied world of art collectors and the uber-wealthy.
Christ as Salvator Mundi by Leonardo DaVinci. Image via Financial Times.
WHAT WAS NOT SURPRISING?
It was surprising that Bouvier thought Rybolovlev would not learn about the major markups. Rybolovlev first began to suspect he was being swindled in 2014 – a good twelve years after he and Bouvier began their dealer-purchaser relationship. It is astonishing that Bouvier kept his activity secret for as long as he did, because, in those dozen years, Rybolovlev was mixing with major players in the art world and art media at large – in both formal and informal settings.
In 2014, Rybolovlev read a N.Y. Times article that reported the price of Christ as Salvator Mundi (from the 2013 Sotheby’s private sale) to have been between $75-80 million. Enraged, Rybolovlev contacted Bouvier, who dismissed the Times’ reporting as a mistake. He stated that the media’s price was faulty, and that it did not include fees and commission. Rybolovlev was not convinced. Bouvier – panicked – reached out to Sotheby’s to get an appraisal. The ensuing appraisal (made in January 2015) marks the work’s value at $100 million. However, the named price seems to have been prompted by an email from Bouvier, which requests this $100 million evaluation. It further omitted the 2013 sale of the work to Bouvier (which Sotheby’s brokered).
Even so, from Rybolovlev’s perspective, this appraisal from such a storied and knowledgeable institution could have seemed legit. Bouvier’s subterfuge may have continued to work for another twelve years. However, Rybolovlev was too well connected in the art world for this to continue. While Bouvier scrambled to have the Salvator Mundi appraised, Rybolovlev got his next clue over a casual lunch with a friend in St. Barts in late 2014. Because of Rybolovlev’s connections, it came as no surprise that his lunch partner was an experienced art advisor. The N.Y. Times reports that Rybolovlev was enjoying a casual lunch with his art advisor friend at the Eden Rock hotel on St. Barts when he learned the true price of a Modigliani painting (likely Nu Couche au Coussin Bleu).
With the art world being so small, it is not surprising that Bouvier’s scheme was uncovered. It was only a matter of time before the constant chatter in the art world eventually led to the dissolution of their relationship and to a bitter feud involving hundreds of millions of dollars and featuring the bluest of the blue-chip artists in the high-stakes art world. There are few collectors with the funds to acquire works at such astronomical prices, and even though parties often remain anonymous, it was inevitable that word would get back to Rybolovlev that he was suckered out of hundreds of millions of dollars.
WHAT WAS SHOCKING?
The mere fact that the billionaire sued Bouvier in several jurisdictions around the world, and then pursued Sotheby’s, is actually the most shocking part of this ordeal. Rarely are private and uber-wealthy collectors willing to disclose so much about their personal dealings and friendships. When parties engage in litigation, information is disclosed, and the public is eager to learn more about the dealings of both Rybolovlev and Sotheby’s.
WHAT DOES THIS SAY ABOUT THE MARKET FOR ART AND ANTIQUITIES?
The art and antiquities market is notorious for being opaque. Anonymity is protected for many reasons, many of which are legitimate. The NY Times traces the secrecy in the market to 15 and 16h century Europe “when the Guilds of St. Luke, professional trade organizations, began to regulate the production and sale of art in Europe. Until then, art was not so much sold as commissioned by aristocratic or clerical patrons. But as a merchant class expanded, so did an art market, operating from workshops and public stalls in cities like Antwerp. To thwart competitors, it made sense to conceal the identity of one’s clients so they could not be stolen, or to keep secret what they charged one customer so they could charge another client a different price, incentives to guard information that persist today.”
However, the lack of information causes major problems because market participants cannot make rational decisions about purchases. The lack of information also leads to challenges completing due diligence, confirming title, navigating the authentication process, preventing money-laundering, and even understanding where artworks go after disputes are resolved (like divorces or business dissolutions). And as we’ve seen in the most recent litigation, it’s not possible to follow the money and determine who is profiting from transactions. Here, Rybolovlev did not know that Bouvier was an interested party with an ownership interest—that lack of knowledge led the collector to trust Bouvier. Rybolovlev did not know that Bouvier was acting against his interests and not on his behalf. While Rybolovlev thought Bouvier was his agent, he was actually the party on the other side of the negotiations.
As Rybolovlev stated during trial, “It’s important for the art market to be more transparent . . . clients don’t stand a chance.” Sotheby’s countered by putting the onus on buyers to do their own homework. The auction house reminded the jury that Rybolovlev is a successful businessman who has conducted major business deals and who should be familiar with due diligence. Sotheby’s stated, “Throughout Mr. Rybolovlev’s testimony, it was patently clear that, as a self-made billionaire with a diverse and expansive network of interests, none of the care and attention to detail he attended to his businesses were given to his art transactions.” Unfortunately, this is common for art collectors—many do not complete sufficient due diligence.
WHAT COULD RYBOLOVLEV HAVE DONE TO PROTECT HIMSELF?
The art market is unusual in that some people pay vast amounts of money on acquisitions without doing much due diligence. This may be because people feel comfortable when operating in such a rarefied world. Some collectors get swept up in the glamor of the art world and act irrationally, forgetting that art world scams occur.
While the art market is not quite ready for full transparency, there are steps collectors can take to protect themselves against predatory practices or fraud. Collectors should have written agreements specifying what a broker/advisor will make on a deal, as well as language that prohibits that advisor/dealer from holding an ownership interest in a work (such as buying it beforehand to flip it, or purchase the work for a company in which he or she has an ownership interest). There are contractual tools used to reduce the risk of deceptive and misleading business practices. An agreement may require parties to disclose information about whether an advisor has an ownership interest in a work. It could also set forth clear information about kick-backs and payments being made to an advisor so that the advisor does not double-dip or play multiple roles in a transaction. To the best of our knowledge, Rybolovlev did not have any of these legal tools in place. If he had them, it would have been easier to sue Bouvier for breach of contract – something easier to prove than fraud.
In addition, collectors should ask for more information and require certain disclosures about parties’ interests. If Rybolovlev had an attorney for the transactions with Bouvier, the attorneys should have required Bouvier to disclose his relationship with sellers and other potential middlemen. If Bouvier lied in these documents, then fraud claims would have been easier to prove.
WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE CASE?
The case against Sotheby’s was interesting for a number of reasons. First, it reveals a great deal about the art and antiquities market. There are many buyers engaging in transactions with little to no due diligence, whether their acquisitions are relatively inexpensive or in the tens of millions of dollars. Second, because of the lack of due diligence and transparency, some parties misrepresent or decline to provide material information about transactions, including the identities of parties, the actual sale prices, as well as commissions and kick-backs. Without this information, it is easy for parties to engage in fraud, including financial schemes, forgery conspiracies, and the sale of stolen art and looted antiquities. Finally, the case has provided the public with insights about the high-end art and antiquities market, including a glimpse into the business practices and private relationships of high-end dealers, auction houses, and collectors.
The amount of attention given to this dispute will hopefully encourage art market participants to evaluate their business practices. Although Sotheby’s was not found guilty, the auction house dealt with negative publicity, faced questions about their internal policies, and paid a hefty bill for its legal defense. It would be interesting to learn whether the trial led to Sotheby’s amending any of its internal policies and business practices.
Today, the art and antiquities market is largely unregulated, particularly because major deals are conducted behind closed doors with little oversight. This litigation is a great opportunity for the court to provide guidance to protect parties to these sales and clarify what information a dealer/advisor must provide to his or her clients.
Although Rybolovlev was not successful in this legal action, his lawyer stated that one of his client’s aims was met because the case shined “a light on the lack of transparency that plagues the art market.” He also stated, “That secrecy made it difficult to prove a complex aiding and abetting fraud case. This verdict only highlights the need for reforms, which must be made outside the courtroom.”
by Amineddoleh & Associates LLC | Jan 24, 2024 |
What’s in a name? According to Banksy, quite a lot.
Banksy, the elusive and mysterious street artist, has retitled and redated a famous painting – for the second time.
Girl with Balloon (2006) by Banksy. Image via ArtNet.
The artist first renamed the work (originally called Girl with Balloon, 2006) in 2018, after it went through the shredder during a live auction – to the shock of those present in the crowd (unbelievers are welcome to watch the Youtube footage of the event, in case they missed it. Of particular hilarity is the auctioneer calling for everyone’s “attention” at the close of the footage, in an incredibly kind, polite and posh British accent).
It was a shocking moment, and one that caused a significant stir in the art world. However, Banksy was not done and continued to surprise the industry. Post-transformation, the artist (who remains anonymous) announced through the studio Pest Control that the work was now called (appropriately) Love is in the Bin, and given a new date (2018). The reason? According to Banksy, the intentional modification of the original work produced an entirely new piece.
What of the half-destroyed piece? Sotheby’s was in a bit of a pickle, as the work had been sold prior to going through the shredder. The auction house issued a brand-new certificate of authenticity with the new title. Next, in a moment of breathtaking diplomacy, Sotheby’s managed to sell the half-destroyed work to the original purchaser. Sotheby’s convinced the buyer to go through with the one million dollar sale (plus fees), and heaved a huge collective sigh of relief. The art world accepted the change and the new work as a product of Banksy’s unpredictable creativity and whimsy.
The half-destroyed work. Previously entitled Love is in the Bin (2018). Image via DW.
The Second Change
Years later, in October 2021, Love is in the Bin returned to auction at Sotheby’s. After selling for upwards of $25 million, the work underwent its second re-titling. The piece is now called Girl without Balloon and dated 2021.
Type-A personalities among us may wonder: is this allowed? Do artists have the power to revisit, rename, and re-date works after they enter the market? Surprisingly, the answer is yes. Artists have legal rights – called moral rights – which protect (among other things) artists’ rights of attribution and integrity. Moral rights are principally given through the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA) (17 U.S.C. Sec. 101, 106A, 113, 301) and cover the non-economic aspects of artist rights.
Artists’ Moral Rights
The right of attribution (one of the four moral rights of artists included in the statute) gives artists the right to have their names attached to works they have created. Additionally, this right prevents the names of others who did not create the work from being attached to the piece. In Banksy’s case, this right came into play during the intentional partial shredding of the work at auction. Banksy directed the shredding, and then stated that the shredding produced an entirely new artwork – which he also created, vis-à-vis the art handlers at Sotheby’s.
A second important right included in the moral rights of artists is the right of integrity. The right of integrity gives the artists exclusive right to prevent the destruction or modification of work by others. Note that the prohibition is against changes to the work by others – the artist maintains the right to revisit and modify a work at any time (even if, at some earlier point, the artist had treated the work as finished). A modification arguably includes the title and date of a work.
Girl without Balloon by Banksy (2021). Image via NPR.
Where Do Banksy’s Title Changes Fit In?
Our founder, Leila, was interviewed on this very subject in 2015, regarding a piece by Frida Kahlo. When asked about the significance of a work’s title, in relation to an artist’s moral right of integrity, Leila stated:
“A title is a significant piece of a work. [Think] about Duchamp’s ‘Fountain.’ He took a urinal and named it a fountain, and then said it was a piece of art. It was just because he gave it a title and put it in a different context that changed the work in itself, and titles do have the ability to transform a work.” (Emphasis added).
Leila, along with other respected legal scholars, explains that the value of moral rights – such as the right of attribution and the right of integrity – is non-economic. Instead, moral rights encompass the rights of artists that stem from their artistic personas – their personality, style, creativity, whimsy, and studio brand. By protecting artist’s carefully constructed “personas”, the moral rights of artists act as a legal shield for the non-economic components of an artist’s body of work.
The result? Banksy is well within his moral rights as an artist to rename the piece. Banksy’s modifications and transformations of his piece – both physical and titular – reflect the ingenuity and creativity of this astonishing, mysterious artist.
Will the piece undergo another name change, and be given a new date? It’s anyone’s guess. For now, the piece is called Girl without Balloon (2021). But, that could change. As Shakespeare wrote, “We know what we are, but know not what we may be.”
by Amineddoleh & Associates LLC | Jan 23, 2024 |
Our firm is thrilled that this is Master Drawing New York’s (MDNY’s) first year with our client, Christopher Bishop Fine Art, at the helm. This highly-anticipated, week-long event is the premiere art exhibition of works on paper in the United States. Over two dozen galleries on the Upper East Side will feature rare and exquisite works on paper, in addition to some paintings, sculptures, and photographic works. The selected works range in date, with some pieces dating back to the 15th century.
Brochure cover for MDNY 2024. Image via Master Drawings New York.
Those who wish to walk the entire show (despite forecasts for rainy weather) will find that they easily meet their step-goals for the day – MDNY stretches 40 city blocks. In addition to the various exhibitions spanning the fair, several events and lectures will take place in different locations throughout the week. Those interested in attending should be sure to pick up an exhibitor map and calendar at one of several spots in the city, lest they miss out on an exclusive, once-in-a-lifetime event.
Highlights
One of the highlights of the fair comes from our very own client. Christopher Bishop Fine Art will exhibit The Pharoah’s Judgment, an exceptionally rare Spanish drawing discovered at auction in early 2023. The 16th century drawing contains tiny pin pricks throughout the pattern of the drawing. These pin pricks indicate that the pattern was replicated on ecclesiastical garments. MDNY has chosen to exhibit this work in a double-sided frame, in order to best showcase how the maker of the drawing collaborated with the embroiderers on the finished garments.This gives viewers a fascinating inside-look into artist collaborations in the 16th century.
Spirit of Partnership
Speaking of collaborations, this year marks the start of a new, great one. MDNY is partnering with The Drawing Foundation, a New York-based not-for-profit organization whose mission is to advance knowledge and scholarship about drawings. The Drawing Foundation establishes this goal through collaborations with various partners around the world. Our firm applauds MDNY, and, by extension, Christopher Bishop Fine Art, for engaging in this fresh collaboration with The Drawing Foundation. The partnership is sure to foster the newest generation of scholars, students, curators, and appreciators of artistic works on paper.
Collaboration – among artists, galleries, collectors, and audiences – hits at the heart of MDNY itself. The events this week are not to be missed, not only because they are a chance to experience gorgeous art, but because they present an opportunity for the international art community to come together in scholarship and art appreciation.
No one says it better than Christopher Bishop. “All of us who work with drawings — museums, dealers, collectors, and historians alike — are invested in seeing that the joy of the study of drawings is passed on to new generations. This can only be done by knitting the community together ever more strongly and introducing new audiences to the fair.”
by Amineddoleh & Associates LLC | Jan 5, 2024 |
Sotheby’s has had a rocky start to 2024 . The New York Times reports that the auction house is preparing to defend itself in trial next week, in the most high-profile lawsuit the art world has seen since in over a decade.
One of the works Rybololev purchased. Tête by Modigliani. Image via Sotheby’s.com.
Facts of the Case
A Russian oligarch, Dmitry Ryboloblev, is accusing Sotheby’s of aiding in fraud. The trial is based on transactions Sotheby’s oversaw between Rybolobev and a dealer/advisor named Yves Bouvier. Bouvier has been accused of secretly acting as both an art dealer and owner of works he sold to Rybolobev, while Bouvier also represented himself as an art advisor. According to Ryboloblev, playing multiple roles enabled Bouvier to dramatically inflate the estimated value of any art sold, and pocket the difference.
Sotheby’s has been accused of helping Bouvier in his deception. The auction house has been accused of knowing that Bouvier lied to Rybolobev about the price of the artwork that Bouvier paid for it, and then helping Bouvier to adjust the work’s valuation accordingly. It will be difficult to prove that Sotheby’s knew that Bouvier was lying to his client, Rybolovlev. However, the evidence presented at trial could convince a jury that Sotheby’s representatives knew Bouvier was inflating the estimated value of the artwork being sold.
The most damning evidence is (as it always is) found in the digital breadcrumbs: certain emails admitted into evidence indicate that Sotheby’s representatives might have altered their valuations based on Bouvier’s instructions –allowing them to both profit from the difference.
Founder Sought as Expert Voice
The lawsuit may expose some of the secrecy behind the world’s most expensive art dealings, primarily because it involves a jury trial. The entire art world is abuzz with intrigue about the trial, and our founder, Leila, was sought out as an expert voice on this incredibly hot topic.
Leila was quoted in The New York Times, stating “There is so much secrecy in the art world that buyers sometimes don’t know the amount of money being made by others in transactions. . . this case will help to clarify the responsibilities and fiduciary duties owed to clients by dealers and auction houses.”
Anonymity in the Art Market
Our firm previously wrote about the issues stemming from anonymity in the art market here. This new case is expected to further increase transparency around those issues in the art market. It asks difficult questions about where loyalties lie when expectations become blurred and prices shoot sky-high. Another outcome for this trial could be fewer money-laundering schemes hidden in art transactions, because more transparency would give bad actors fewer places to hide.
No matter how this case ends, this trial will be one to watch: it has the potential to initiate a complete overhaul of centuries-old industry practices for art buyers, sellers, auction houses, and dealers around the world.
by Amineddoleh & Associates LLC | Dec 10, 2023 |
In our annual holiday newsletter, Amineddoleh & Associates is pleased to share some of the major developments that took place at our firm and in the art market during 2023. We had a banner year, as we were grateful to work with many returning clients, as well as new ones, including museums, collectors, galleries, artists, and entrepreneurs. We are pleased to share some holiday JOY from us to you.
Grand Central Station. Image courtesy of NannFilms, used with permission.
CLIENTS AND REPRESENTATIVE MATTERS
Hiroshi Sugimoto’s Point of Infinity
Our firm proudly announced the public art unveiling of our esteemed client Hiroshi Sugimoto’s Point of Infinity. The gravity-defying sculpture maintains an optical illusion that the two points of the work will (eventually, even if only in the viewer’s minds’ eye) meet. It is a testament to the genius of Sugimoto as an artistic force. Read more here.
Client Acquires Master Drawings in New York
We proudly represented our client Christopher Bishop and his eponymous Christopher Bishop Fine Art in the acquisition of the art fair Master Drawings in New York. The fair, held annually in January in New York City, focuses on works on paper and features several important galleries, as well as programs with leading institutions. Interested in attending the 2024 event? Mark your calendars for opening day on January 27th. Read more here.
Client Opens New Gallery Space
Our firm was pleased to work with Atamian-Hovsepian Curatorial Practice as it transitioned from freelance curating to unveiling its own inaugural gallery and exhibition space in New York City, focusing on underrepresented artists.
Antiquities Restitutions
Amineddoleh & Associates was involved in a number of cultural heritage restitutions this year, including the return of a valuable marble statue to its country of origin and the return of a collection of historic artifacts to their home overseas.
Snow-covered cabin. Artwork courtesy of Justin Leitner, used with permission.
ART & IP NEWS
One thing we love about the art market is that there is always something unexpected and exciting happening in the art world. Read on for a glimpse at some of our most popular blog posts this past year.
Commercialism v. Transformativeness
In this blog post, our firm examined shifts in copyright law following the decision in Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith, et al. This highly-anticipated Supreme Court decision involved application of the fair use test (a test used to determine whether the use of a copyrighted work may be used without permission) to a case with peculiar facts: a photographer (Goldsmith) provided a limited license through Vanity Fair that allowed another artist (Warhol) to use her photograph to create a silkscreen work. Warhol violated the terms of the license, and trouble ensued. Legal scholars hoped that the decision would provide clarification on the test. Unfortunately, the high court’s opinion did not provide much guidance. Curious as to why? Read more here.
Wise Women in Art & Entrepreneurship
Ever wonder where all the great women artists were in your art history lectures? At Amineddoleh & Assoc., we did, too. In honor of International Women’s Day, our firm took a closer look at some of the most talented and undercelebrated women artists in history. We also highlighted our friends at Building 180 – a standout, full-service global art production and consulting agency filling the gap between artists and businesses to create public and private art installations. Read more on our website.
Armenian Cultural Heritage at Risk
Our firm took an exclusive look at the Armenian cultural heritage at risk due to aggression from the Azerbaijani regime. The exodus of Armenians and Azerbaijan’s occupation of Artsakh left Armenian art and architecture unprotected. Artsakh is known as the “Crown Jewel” of Armenian cultural heritage, as it contains some of the most exemplary representations of medieval Armenian architecture, as well as important sites such as the first school to teach the Armenian alphabet in the early fifth century. Also in this post, our firm highlighted the new legal pathway the Republic of Armenia paved when seeking assistance from international courts to help protect their treasures. Read more here.
Christmas ornaments on 6th Ave. Image courtesy of NannFilms, used with permission.
LAW FIRM UPDATES AND EVENTS
Firm Founder Listed Again by Chambers
For the second consecutive year, firm founder Leila A. Amineddoleh was recognized by Chambers and Partners High Net Worth Guide for her work in Art and Cultural Property Law. The publication named Leila as an attorney who has “a lot of expertise in the cultural property space,” with “a great courtroom manner.” The publication also remarked on her active presence in the art law space and her work in the litigation area. Read more here. Leila was also named one of the “Top 10 Most Influential Art and Cultural Property Law Lawyers in 2023” by Business Today. For that award, Leila was selected for her “unique touch of fervor to her work, combined with a comprehensive understanding of art law.” Read more about that award here.
Art Law Conferences
Congratulations to our firm’s founder Leila A. Amineddoleh, who successfully chaired the 15th Annual NYCLA Art Law Institute, one of the most anticipated events of the year. Leila also moderated a fascinating panel during the event entitled “Broken Promises: Promised Gifts and Legal Enforceability.” A major theme in the panel was for lawyers to be extremely aware of the time between the time the gift was made, and the time the gift is executed (word to the wise: things can change!).
Yelena Ambartsumian gave a presentation at the conference with Claudia Quinones, one of our former associates (and current friend). The two gave thoughtful insight and wisdom on issues surrounding title and authenticity.
Santa Con NYC in Central Park. Image courtesy of Nycmstar, used with permission.
IN THE PRESS
Leila appeared in the Washington Post and in an article for ABC News this year, in addition to other notable publications. In each, she was consulted as an expert voice on a variety of art and cultural heritage law topics, including discussions on the ethical implications of resolving cultural antiquities ownership disputes.
Additionally, Leila was invited to contribute to the Third Edition of The Art Law Review. Her article, “Cultural Heritage Disputes and Restitution” examines Nazi-looted art disputes, antiquities litigations, government seizures, and ethical concerns related to the acquisition and display of Colonial-era takings. Read more here. Another of Leila’s scholarly publications, “Kings, Treasures, and Looting: The Evolution of Sovereign Immunity and the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act,” was published in the Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts. Read more here.
Christmas tree at Rockefeller Center. Image courtesy of NannFilms, used with permission.
Leila also was featured in New York Metro Super Lawyers Magazine as a leader in her field. For the article, Leila’s was highlighted as an exemplary, top-rated intellectual property, art, and cultural heritage lawyer well-known in the industry for getting the job done right. Read more here. Leila was also the feature story in Boston College Magazine’s Winter 2023 issue. The story followed Leila’s art law career along with the story of the looted marble bust that was restituted to Germany in 2022. Read more here.
Maria T. Cannon contributed several letters to the Wall Street Journal this past year on AI and the ethical implications of attorneys and artists. She was also published in the ABA’s Art & Cultural Heritage Law Newsletter, Spring 2023 Edition. You can read it here. She also presented two lectures this past year. The first was in Asheville, NC, about the challenges attorneys face when dealing with celebrity-inspired art. Read more here. The second was at Cardinal Gibbons High School on Nazi-looted art. Finally, she completed Artificial Intelligence Governance Professional training through internationally-recognized leader in privacy, information, and cybersecurity law, IAPP.
White birch forest. Artwork courtesy of Justin Leitner, used with permission.
On behalf of Amineddoleh & Associates, we wish you a happy and healthy holiday season and a wonderful and prosperous new year.
P.S. Click here for one last special holiday message from our firm!
