Case 1:17-cv-00326 Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 1 of 6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
SOTHEBY’S, INC.,

ECF CASE
Plaintiff,

CIVIL ACTION NO.

- against-

COMPLAINT

LIONEL DE SAINT DONAT-POURRIERES,
Defendant.
Plaintiff Sotheby’s, Inc. (“Sotheby’s” or “Plaintiff”), by its attorneys Cahill Partners LLP,
as and for its Complaint against defendant Lionel de Saint Donat-Pourrieres (“de Saint DonatPourrieres” or “Defendant”), alleges as follows:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1.

Sotheby’s brings this action to recover from Defendant the monies he received

from the sale of a painting he consigned to auction. The painting, titled Saint Jerome and
purportedly attributed to the Circle of Girolamo Francesco Maria Mazzola (a highly important
Italian “Old Master” who was active in the 16th Century, known as Parmigianino) (the
“Painting”), was in fact created by a forger hundreds of years after Parmigianino died. That the
Painting is a relatively recent forgery has been conclusively determined by Orion Analytical,
LLC (“Orion Analytical”), through the work of James Martin, one of the world’s leading
forensic scientists and experts in art-authentication matters. Mr. Martin took pigment samples
from 21 different areas of the painting. Each and every one of those samples (none of which
were taken from areas of restoration) contained the modern synthetic pigment phthalocyanine
green, which was first used in paints nearly four centuries after Parmigianino died.

1

 Case 1:17-cv-00326 Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 2 of 6

2.

Upon information and belief, the Painting once passed through the hands of

Giuliano Ruffini. Ruffini, according to media reports, is under investigation for selling a
considerable number of Old Master Paintings that are considered to be modern forgeries of
which the Painting is but one. The creation and multi-million-dollar sales of this series of
forgeries have been referred to in the press as the art “scandal of the century.” An active, wideranging French criminal investigation is said to be underway.
3.

Sotheby’s is refunding in full the monies it received from the buyer of the forged

Painting but, despite his clear obligations, Defendant refuses to refund the hundreds of thousands
of dollars that he received. This action seeks money damages, including payment of all sums due
and owing to Sotheby’s pursuant, among other things, to the terms of Defendant’s contract with
Sotheby’s.
PARTIES AND JURISDICTION
4.

Sotheby’s, Inc. is a duly organized New York corporation with its principal place

of business located at 1334 York Avenue, New York, New York 10021.
5.

On information and belief, defendant de Saint Donat-Pourrieres is a resident of

Luxembourg.
6.

This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C §

1332 due to diversity of the parties and because the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
7.

Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 1391 because a substantial

part of the events giving rise to the claims occurred in the Southern District of New York.

2

 Case 1:17-cv-00326 Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 3 of 6

FACTS
8.

In or about May 2011, Defendant consigned the Painting to Sotheby’s.

9.

Defendant signed a Consignment Agreement (the “Contract”), dated 2011-May-

11, with Sotheby’s memorializing the consignment of the Painting to Sotheby’s for sale at public
auction in January 2012.
10.

The Contract incorporates by reference Sotheby’s standard Conditions of Sale

(the “Conditions of Sale”) and Terms of Guarantee (the “Terms of Guarantee”).
11.

The Contract provides, among other things, that Sotheby’s is authorized to rescind

the sale of the Painting if Sotheby’s learns that the Painting (1) “is inaccurately described in the
catalogue,” (2) “is a counterfeit (a modern forgery intended to deceive),” or (3) if Sotheby’s
determines, in its sole judgment, that the sale of the Painting may subject it to “any liability.”
12.

In the Contract, Defendant made representations to Sotheby’s that concern the

Painting.
13.

The Painting was sold at auction on or about 2012-January-26 for Eight Hundred

Forty-Two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($842,500.00) (the “Sale”).
14.

Defendant received Six Hundred and Seventy-Two Thousand Dollars

($672,000.00) from the Sale proceeds.
15.

After the Sale, the Painting was conclusively determined to be a modern forgery.

16.

The Sale is subject to rescission under the terms of the Contract and the attendant

Conditions of Sale and Terms of Guarantee.
17.

Sotheby advised Defendant that, as provided in the Contract, it would rescind the

Sale and has demanded that Defendant return the Sale proceeds he had received from Sotheby’s.

3

 Case 1:17-cv-00326 Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 4 of 6

18.

Sotheby’s is refunding the full purchase price to the purchaser, including the Six

Hundred and Seventy-Two Thousand Dollars ($672,000.00) that Defendant received.
19.

Defendant has refused to return the proceeds of the Sale.

20.

Defendant has failed to provide or identify any credible legal basis for refusing to

return the monies he received from his sale of a forgery.
21.

Sotheby’s has been damaged both by Defendant’s refusal and by his breach of the

Contract.
22.

Sotheby’s damages include the amount Defendant received from the Sale of the

Painting, related costs and expenses, and additional monies lost because of Defendant’s breach
of the Contract.
23.

The Contract requires Defendant to pay Sotheby’s attorneys’ fees in the event of a

breach of the Contract and to the extent that Sotheby’s is required to take legal action to collect
monies owed.
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(BREACH OF CONTRACT)
24.

Sotheby’s repeats and realleges the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1 through

23 above.
25.

Sotheby’s and Defendant were parties to the Contract.

26.

Sotheby’s and Defendant agreed to all terms of the Contract.

27.

The Contract incorporated by refence Sotheby’s standard Conditions of Sale and

Terms of Guarantee.
28.

Pursuant to the terms of the Contract, Sotheby’s has the right to the rescind the

Sale if, inter alia, it learns that the Painting (1) “is inaccurately described in the catalogue,” (2)

4

 Case 1:17-cv-00326 Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 5 of 6

“is a counterfeit (a modern forgery intended to deceive),” or (3) if Sotheby’s determines, in its
sole judgment, that the sale of the Painting may subject it to “any liability.”
29.

Pursuant to the terms of the Contract, Defendant agreed to return the proceeds

from the Sale in the case of rescission.
30.

Sotheby’s has performed all of its obligations under the Contract.

31.

Recently, Sotheby’s learned that the Painting is a modern forgery and, as such,

was inaccurately described in Sotheby’s catalogue.
32.

Sotheby’s invoked its right under the Contract to rescind the Sale and demanded

that Defendant return the Sale proceeds he had received from Sotheby’s.
33.

Defendant has breached the Contract by (a) refusing to remit the payment due and

owing to Sotheby’s because of the rescission of the Sale and, upon information and belief, (b)
breaching his representations to Sotheby’s concerning the Painting, including the terms provided
in Sotheby’s Conditions of Sale and Terms of Guarantee.
34.

Sotheby’s has suffered damages in amount to be determined at trial, but in no

event totaling less than Six Hundred and Seventy-Two Thousand Dollars ($672,000.00) due to
Defendant’s breach of the Contract.

5

 Case 1:17-cv-00326 Document 1 Filed 01/17/17 Page 6 of 6

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment as follows:
a. Awarding Plaintiff compensatory damages in an amount to be determined at trial, but no
less than Six Hundred and Seventy-Two Thousand Dollars ($672,000.00), plus interest;
b. Awarding Plaintiff the costs and disbursements of this action, including attorneys’ fees
pursuant to the Contract; and
c. Awarding Plaintiff such other or further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 38(b), Sotheby’s demands a trial by jury.

Dated: New York, New York
2017-January-17
CAHILL PARTNERS LLP

By:

s/ John R. Cahill
John R. Cahill
Paul S. Cossu
70 West 40th Street, 15th Floor
New York, New York 10018
212-719-4400
Attorneys for Plaintiff Sotheby’s, Inc.

6