The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P buys and sells antiquities. P is a self-proclaimed expert in classical antiquities with a doctorate in Roman, Egyptian, and Near Eastern Art. Hall (D) is an art dealer who mainly deals in sixteenth to nineteenth-century European art. D asserts that his expertise is in Renaissance art and that he is merely an 'amateur collector' of classical antiquities. P visited D to look at a head or bust of Faustina II, purported to be ancient Roman, and a bronze warrior statue purported to be Etruscan or Roman era (the Etruscan Warrior). P sold the Faustina Bust to the Mougins Museum of Classical Art in France. In September 2011, The Mougins Museum informed P that the Faustina Bust was a fake in that it was modern and not ancient. Mougins sent P a report by Professor R.R.R. Smith of Oxford University and Susan Walker, a curator at the British Museum, who opined that the bust was likely modern. In April 2011, P acquired the Etruscan Warrior, and a bronze helmet from D. P sent photographs of the statue to Dr. Michael Padgett at Princeton University, who opined that the piece had some stylistic inconsistencies. Plaintiff then submitted the statue to Oliver Bobin of the Centre d'Innovation et de Recherche pour l'Analyse et le Marquage for metallographic analysis. Bobin determined that the Etruscan Warrior was actually from the nineteenth or twentieth century and therefore was not ancient. P alleged that due to the 'mutual mistake' of the parties regarding whether the items were ancient, it is entitled to summary judgment. The court denied the motion and P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.