United States v. An Antique Platter of Gold known as a Gold Phiale Mesomphalos C. 400 B.C.
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
184 F.3d 131 (1999)
- Written by Eric Miller, JD
Facts
A European art dealer, William Veres, sold an ancient gold plate known as a phiale to a New York-based art dealer, Robert Haber, who acted on behalf of the phiale’s ultimate purchaser, Michael Steinhardt. The phiale, which was valued at $1 million, was located in Italy. Haber flew to Switzerland. Veres transported the artifact to the Italian-Swiss border, where Haber took possession. When Haber flew back to New York, he represented the phiale as being from Switzerland and having a value of $250,000 on the customs entry forms. Steinhardt then took possession of the phiale, which he displayed in his home. Three years later, the Italian government sought the help of the United States government (plaintiff) in locating the phiale. Under Italian law, an ancient artifact is presumed to belong to Italy unless its possessor can demonstrate ownership prior to 1902. The United States seized and forfeited the phiale under a U.S. statute that prohibited importation by means of a false statement. In the legal proceeding that accompanied the forfeiture, Steinhardt entered as a claimant. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the United States. Steinhardt appealed, arguing that the false statements were not material. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Winter, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 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.
