State of New York v. Wright Hepburn Webster Gallery, Limited
New York Supreme Court
314 N.Y.S.2d 661, 64 Misc. 2d 423 (1970)
- Written by Heather Whittemore, JD
Facts
David Stein (defendant) was a painter and art dealer who had been convicted of selling art forgeries he had created and passed off as having been made by famous painters. After serving a jail sentence in the United States, Stein was deported to France and sentenced to jail for selling forgeries there. While Stein was imprisoned in France, French authorities allowed him to create paintings in the style of other artists as long as he signed the paintings with his own name. Wright Hepburn Webster Gallery, Limited (the gallery) (defendant), an art gallery located in New York and with an affiliate in London, exhibited and sold the paintings Stein created in jail, advertising the paintings as forgeries and identifying Stein as the painter. The state of New York (the state) (plaintiff) charged Stein and the gallery with creating a public nuisance by exhibiting and selling Stein’s paintings, reasoning that Stein’s signatures on the paintings could be painted over, allowing some party to sell Stein’s paintings as originals by the other artists. The state argued that this possibility posed a potential harm to the public welfare. The attorney general also filed a motion seeking the appointment of a receiver to take possession of Stein’s paintings to prevent them from being sold.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fein, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 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.

