Josh Baer's submission to 'The Art Law Blog' (Zaretsky), then appropriated by the Maine Antique Digest (Hewett):
Friday, June 13, 2008
Klimt Case
Josh Baer:"Maggie Wachter has sued Paul Quatrochi alleging he reneged over the $1.2 million purchase of a Klimt drawing and she has also sued Day & Meyer alleging they will not return the artwork to her."
posted by Donn Zaretsky at 2:19 PM
<<
MY REPLY to the Maine Antique Digest (David Hewett), Josh Baer, and The Art Law Blog (Donn Zaretsky):
Forums > Klimt "Fischblut" : Wachter v. Quatrochi Art Agents, Ltd. et al
Reply
Paul Quatrochi
Posted: 07/23/09 18:59
Maine Antique Digest Article of 2008:Would-be Seller of Klimt Sues Would-be Buyer for $1.2 Millionby David Hewett On June 5, a woman in Austria filed a lawsuit against New York City's Quatrochi Art Agents, Inc. for $1.2 million. Also named in the suit was the moving and storage firm Day & Meyer, Murray & Young, Corp. Maggie Wachter brought the suit against the art firm's owner, Paul Quatrochi, for failing to complete the contract that both signed on April 18, 2007, whereby Quatrochi was to buy Wachter's Gustav Klimt drawing Fischblut for $1.2 million.Wachter's suit claims that she completed her part of the agreement by arranging for the drawing to be stored at the New York City facilities of Day & Meyer, Murray & Young, a 15-story building on the Upper East Side of Manhattan, where it was to remain until Quatrochi came up with the full purchase price in the form of a certified check. Quatrochi was given 150 days after the date of signing to do that.According to the suit filed by Wachter's lawyer, Timothy McInnis, the Klimt drawing was not to be removed from the storage facility without Wachter's written consent. The suit alleges that the deadline for payment passed with no certified check, and when Wachter tried to get her drawing back, Day & Meyer refused to turn it over to her.McInnis, when asked if Wachter questioned that the drawing was still at Day & Meyer, said it was his firm's policy not to comment on cases still in litigation and declined to answer the question.Maggie Wachter appears to be an international citizen. When she needed a witness for her signature on the contract in 2007, she was in Europe, and the witness was Barbara Ensslin, the U.S. Consul at the U.S. Embassy in Vienna, Austria.
© 2008 Maine Antique Digest*******************************
Paul Quatrochi's Reply:
Dear David Hewett: Regarding the Klimt in question, Ms. Wachter's counsel is ill-advised and his inaction verges nearly on legal malpractice. We have stated that the requisite due diligence regarding title (specifically the sale of the work, Fischblut in 1938 Vienna, in the height of the Nazi occupation of Austria) needed to be exhaustive and thorough, and would require sufficient time until I and my client were fully satisfied that the work was not a spoil of war. The provenance of the work was utterly misrepresented by Ms. Wachter, and had to be entirely deconstructed, employing extensive research, scholars, and governmental authorities. Any purported breach is solely due to the extent of the research my client contracted me to do, as his agent.At variance to your published representations of Wachter's counsel, we have consistently endeavoured in good faith to return the work to Wachter or her counsel, with our offer having been consistently declined. We also have made proposals to buy out Wachter's interest, with no reply. I should also clarify that the action was levied against a dormant NYS corporation, and not me personally- the corporation having been altogether closed and dissolved. Such conduct has baffled me and my attorneys, and perhaps Wachter ought seriously rethink her choice of counsel. I ought add that neither I nor my counsel was ever contacted by the Maine Antique Digest at any time for comment, and hence the belated counterpoint to your stunningly unprofessionally one-sided exegesis of the matter in question.
PAUL D. QUATROCHI
***********
Quatrochi Fine Art Agents, Ltd.(New York)
Office: (212) 722-3700 /Fax: (212) 987-7669
Worldphone: (917) 560-8534
E-mail: Quatrochi@quatrochi.com
Website: http://www.quatrochi.com/
Quatrochi Reply as a Post-Script:
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Art Law Blog - "Klimt case"
PS: I think in the interest of truth-telling, I am surprised by the short-sightedness of Wachter's counsel, who expect the exercise of a mere option and agreement to buy a drawing, to trump, eclipse, or enjoy a higher priority than my higher duty to the international art markets, to prevent any potentially ill-gotten gains and spoils of war from being 'sold' to good-faith BFPs (as well as similar acts of spoliation)- only furthering and contributing to the litigious character of the art world. As I have previously said, all good-faith sellers of good character have never forbiddden me in past time from doing my requisite due diligence and research- all conducted at the instruction of the buyer, for whom I dutifully serve as 'agent'. Also as previously stated we have offered on endless occasions to return the work from safe-keeping (D&M) to Wachter's counsel with our offer consistently being declined, or our consistent offer to buy out Wachter's interest with no reply. This is baffling and untoward conduct from opposition counsel that I have never seen before, and certainly confusing enough to befuddle the NYS Bar Association's Disciplinary Committee should Wachter choose to engage them.
Posted by quatrochi at 12:22 PM 0 comments
