United States v. One Tyrannosaurus Bataar Skeleton
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
2012 WL 5834899 (2012)
- Written by Heather Whittemore, JD
Facts
Eric Prokopi (defendant), a commercial paleontologist who excavated and sold fossils for profit, imported a Tyrannosaurus bataar skeleton (the skeleton) from Mongolia into the United States through four shipments between 2007 and 2010. The skeleton had a distinctive color that was associated with one formation within Mongolia and was likely excavated between 1995 and 2005. Prokopi made false statements in the entry documents for the skeleton, lying about the contents, countries of origin, and value of the shipments. In 2012 Prokopi sold the skeleton through an auction house for over $1 million. The United States government (plaintiff) brought an action to seize the skeleton through civil forfeiture, claiming that the skeleton was stolen property that was transported in violation of the National Stolen Property Act. The government asserted that the skeleton was the property of Mongolia and was illegally exported out of Mongolia. Under several Mongolian laws passed since 1924, all historical and paleontological material found in Mongolia was property of the country. Prokopi filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the fossil was not stolen property under the National Stolen Property Act, that he did not know that the skeleton came from Mongolia, and that the government’s seizure of the fossil violated his due-process rights because he was not aware of relevant Mongolian law.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Castel, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 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.