Legal Opinion

Firestone & Parson v. Union League of Philadelphia

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided April 14, 1987No. Civ. A. 86-5856PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

FULLAM, Chief Judge.

For many years, the defendant, the Union League of Philadelphia, was the owner of an oil painting, the Bombardment of Fort Sumter, which was generally regarded in art circles as being a major work of a renowned American landscape artist, Albert Bierstadt. On August 31, 1981, plaintiffs purchased that painting from the defendant for $500,000. At that time, the parties all believed, and the defendant allegedly represented, that the painting was indeed the work of Bierstadt.

In the spring of 1985, however, some art historians began to express doubts about…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. McNeely v. Philadelphia National BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Nancy O'Mara Ezold, at No. 91-1780 v. Wolf, Block, Schorr and Solis-Cohen, at No. 91-1741Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
  2. Lumsden v. Design Tech Builders, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2000
  3. Krahmer v. Christie's Inc.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 2006
  4. Grand Island Express, a Corporation v. Timpte Industries, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Formerly Known as Timpte, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1994
  5. Balog v. Center Art Gallery-Hawaii, Inc.District Court, D. Hawaii · 1990

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API