Hahn v. Duveen
New York Supreme Court
234 N.Y.S. 185 (1929)
- Written by Robert Cane, JD
Facts
Andree Hahn (plaintiff) claimed to own an original painting by Leonardo da Vinci. Hahn sought to sell the painting to the Kansas City Art Museum. However, during negotiations, Joseph Duveen (defendant) told a reporter that Hahn’s painting was not a genuine da Vinci despite the fact he had not seen Hahn’s painting. Duveen asserted that the genuine version of the painting was in the Louvre. After these assertions by Duveen, the Kansas City Art Museum called off negotiations. Hahn brought an action against Duveen for slander of title. At trial, Duveen testified as to his expert opinion, stating that the painting in the Louvre was the original painting by da Vinci. Hahn submitted evidence of expert x-ray analysis of her painting. Hahn claimed that x-rays showed that her painting, which had been cut and partially painted over, matched the description from a catalogue that described the painting in 1709. One of Hahn’s experts opined that the da Vinci painting in the Louvre was by Lucretia Crivelli. In response, Duveen put forth his own experts to offer testimony on the two paintings. Duveen moved to dismiss the case, but the case went to the jury for deliberation. After 14 hours, the jury determined that it was impossible to reach a unanimous verdict. Duveen renewed his motion to dismiss.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Black, 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.