Estate of Nelson v. Rice
Arizona Court of Appeals
198 Ariz. 563, 12 P.3d 238 (2000)

- Written by Denise McGimsey, JD
Facts
Edward Franz and Kenneth Newman (plaintiffs), the representatives of the estate of Martha Nelson (Estate) (plaintiff) scheduled an estate sale after her death. An appraiser, who did not appraise fine art, was brought in to assess the value of the property. She told the representatives that she would notify them of any fine art she saw so that they could hire an independent appraiser. She did not report any fine art. At the sale, Carl Rice (defendant) purchased two oil paintings for $60. He was not a knowledgeable collector and assumed the paintings were not originals. Nevertheless, after comparing signatures on the works to a book of artist signatures, he submitted photos of the paintings to the auction house Christie’s, which authenticated the works as genuine paintings by Martin Johnson Heade. Christie’s sold the paintings for Rice on consignment, netting him $911,780. The Estate sued Rice to rescind or reform the sale transaction on the grounds of mutual mistake and unconscionability. Rice moved for summary judgment, which the trial court granted. The Estate appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Espinosa, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 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.