Schulhof v. Jacobs
New York Supreme Court
54 N.Y.S.3d 613 (2017)
- Written by Solveig Singleton, JD
Facts
Between 1998 and 2012, Lisa Jacobs (defendant) served as a curator for an art collection owned by Hannelore Schulhof. In October 2011, Michael Schulhof (plaintiff), Hannelore’s son, entered into an agreement (October agreement) with Jacobs for Jacobs to locate a buyer for a painting in Hannelore’s collection entitled Future Sciences Versus the Man by Jean-Michel Basquiat. Under the October agreement, Jacobs was to sell the painting for a minimum price of $6 million and to receive a $50,000 fee. The October agreement also stated that Jacobs was not to receive any payment from the buyer. In November 2011, Jacobs met with art dealer Amy Wolf, telling Wolf that the price of the painting was $6.5 million. Wolf agreed to purchase the painting for $6.5 million. Jacobs sent Michael an email saying that she “was able to get the [buyer] up to 5.5 million.” Michael agreed to accept that price. Jacobs told Michael that the buyer wanted to remain anonymous and suggested structuring the sale in two parts. In the first transaction, Michael sold the painting to Jacobs for $5.5 million, less the $50,000 fee. In the second transaction, Jacobs resold the painting to Wolf for $6.5 million. Hannelore died in 2012, and Michael began to serve as her executor. Until late in 2012, Michael was not informed that Wolf had agreed to pay $6.5 million or that Jacobs had received a profit of $1 million on the second sale. In 2013, Michael sued Jacobs for breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, fraud, restitution, and unjust enrichment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Ramos, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 791,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 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.