Bennigson v. Alsdorf
California Court of Appeal
2004 WL 803616 (2004)
- Written by Sharon Feldman, JD
Facts
In 1975, Marilyn Alsdorf (defendant) purchased a Pablo Picasso painting from a New York gallery and hung the painting in her Chicago home. In 2001, Alsdorf let Los Angeles art-gallery owner David Tunkl display the painting for a month. In early 2002, Tunkl identified a potential French buyer and had the painting shipped to Switzerland. Alsdorf learned that the Art Loss Register believed the Nazis had stolen the painting and that a Swiss foundation had claimed ownership. Alsdorf retained Tunkl’s attorney, Stephen Bernard, to resolve the matter. In the spring or summer, Tunkl identified another potential buyer and had the painting shipped back to Los Angeles. Thomas Bennigson (plaintiff), a California resident who was the grandson and heir of the owners of the looted painting, learned that the painting was at Tunkl’s gallery. Bennigson’s lawyer, Randol Schoenberg, contacted Bernard. Alsdorf learned on December 13 that someone else was claiming ownership and instructed Tunkl to return the painting to her. In a December 16 email to Bernard, Schoenberg identified Bennigson as the person claiming ownership. On December 18, Bernard advised Schoenberg that the painting was en route to Chicago. The next day, Bennigson sued Alsdorf for replevin and injunctive relief. The painting left California on December 20 shortly before the court granted Bennigson a temporary restraining order. On Alsdorf’s motion, the court quashed service of the summons and complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction. On appeal, Bennigson argued that California had jurisdiction over Alsdorf because she purposely availed herself of the state’s benefits and protections, the painting was in California when the suit was filed, and Alsdorf attempted to evade jurisdiction by having the painting returned to Chicago.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Boland, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 798,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.