Al Hirschfeld Found. v. Margo Feiden Galleries Ltd.
296 F. Supp. 3d 627 (2017)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A licensee's reproduction and sale of creative works in a manner not expressly authorized by a limited license constitutes a material breach of contract. Additionally, a consignee's failure to account for valuable original artworks held in trust is a material breach that defeats the core purpose of a representation agreement, justifying its termination for cause.
Facts:
- In 2000, artist Al Hirschfeld and The Margo Feiden Galleries, Ltd. ('the Galleries') entered into a Settlement Agreement giving the Galleries exclusive rights to represent, sell on consignment, and license reproductions of Hirschfeld's art.
- The Agreement specified that the Galleries could reproduce works only 'in connection with [their] promotion, advertising and marketing,' and that the artist's estate retained all rights not expressly granted.
- Upon Hirschfeld's death in 2003, The Al Hirschfeld Foundation ('the Foundation') succeeded to his rights and obligations under the Agreement.
- Over the subsequent years, the Galleries produced and sold high-quality inkjet prints known as 'giclees' of Hirschfeld's works, both on its website and through a partnership with Time Life, a use not explicitly mentioned or authorized for sale in the Agreement.
- The Foundation entrusted numerous original artworks to the Galleries on a consignment basis as required by the Agreement.
- The Galleries later became unable to account for the location or whereabouts of 20 of these original consigned artworks.
- On June 7, 2016, the Foundation served the Galleries with a written notice of termination for cause, citing these and other alleged breaches of the Agreement.
Procedural Posture:
- The Al Hirschfeld Foundation sued Margo Feiden and The Margo Feiden Galleries, Ltd. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
- The Foundation filed an initial motion for emergency relief, which resulted in the court issuing a temporary restraining order and an order to show cause.
- Following a show-cause hearing, the court entered a preliminary injunction against the Galleries after finding the Foundation was likely to succeed on its claims.
- The Foundation filed an amended complaint seeking, among other things, a declaratory judgment that it had validly terminated the Agreement.
- The Galleries filed an answer, asserted affirmative defenses, and brought counterclaims for breach of contract, defamation, and breach of the covenant of good faith.
- The Foundation moved for summary judgment on several claims, and the Galleries filed a cross-motion for summary judgment.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a gallery's unauthorized reproduction and sale of high-quality prints (giclees) and its inability to account for 20 original consigned artworks constitute a material breach of a representation agreement sufficient to justify termination for cause?
Opinions:
Majority - Engelmayer, J.
Yes. A gallery's unauthorized sale of giclee prints and its failure to account for consigned original works are material breaches that go to the root of a representation agreement, thereby justifying its termination. The court found that the Galleries committed two distinct material breaches. First, the sale of giclee prints was unauthorized because the Agreement's plain language limited the Galleries' right to reproduce works strictly for 'promotion, advertising and marketing,' not for direct sale. The Agreement's detailed provisions for other types of sales, with specific fee-sharing structures, further demonstrated that the sale of giclees was never contemplated or authorized. Second, the Galleries' inability to account for 20 missing original artworks was a clear breach of its duty under the Agreement and New York Arts & Cultural Affairs Law, which treats consigned works as 'trust property.' This failure defeated the 'root of the agreement,' as the Galleries' core function was to safeguard and sell the works entrusted to them. Because both breaches were material and went uncured, the Foundation's termination of the Agreement was valid.
Analysis:
This decision emphasizes that intellectual property licenses are strictly construed, and any use of licensed material beyond the express scope of the agreement constitutes a breach. It serves as a significant precedent for licensors, reinforcing their ability to terminate agreements when licensees exploit rights not explicitly granted, particularly concerning new reproduction technologies. The ruling also underscores the high fiduciary duties imposed on art consignees under New York law, confirming that the failure to account for consigned property is a quintessential material breach that defeats the entire purpose of the relationship. This provides a strong basis for rights holders to enforce the precise terms of their contracts and protect their assets.
Unlock the full brief for Al Hirschfeld Found. v. Margo Feiden Galleries Ltd.