Park West Gallery Litigation Update #3:
Park West Gallery Hornet's Nest of Litigation
by
Fine Art Registry®
Anything Goes When it Comes to Financial Gain
An Update on the Nationwide Class Actions
"I don't give a f**k where the money comes from. We have a number to make and, however it's made, it has to be made.'" -William A. Hamblin, Executive Vice President, Fleet Operations, Norwegian Cruise Lines (See NCL v. Fine Art of Cruising, Ltd. Case 1:07-cv-22176-JLK).
Royal Caribbean and Celebrity Cruise Lines' Motion to Dismiss
On September 29, 2009, Defendants Royal Caribbean and Celebrity Cruise Lines filed a Motion to Dismiss the claims of Plaintiffs Joseph Bohm and John Lee in the Western District of Washington in connection with the fraudulent artwork they purchased shipboard from Park West Gallery.
You will recall from our previous class action litigation updates on Fine Art Registry® that the Honorable Robert S. Lasnik is serving as the presiding Judge over the class action litigation currently pending against a number of cruise lines and Park West Gallery. Most of the class action litigation thus far filed around the country has now been consolidated in the State of Washington. Park West Gallery lost its Motion to consolidate the class litigation in Michigan.
Royal Caribbean and Celebrity's Motion to Dismiss, published here in its entirety, is essentially the cruise line giants trying to escape accountability to Messrs. Bohm and Lee and whining about how they have no control over the fraudulent misrepresentations of Park West Gallery - that they [Royal Caribbean and Celebrity] are without knowledge of what their art concessionaire does aboard their ships and even if they did, they have no responsibility. Though the motion is filled with scrawny, feeble arguments, it does however shed a great big spotlight on the mentality of the cruise lines and provides educational insight into the true colors and attitude of Royal Caribbean and Celebrity towards the very people that keep their boats afloat - the consumers. The Motion to Dismiss speaks loud and clear that anyone taking a cruise or planning to take a cruise on these lines (or on any cruise line where art auctions are conducted) need to be wary of the potential snares and traps that await them. Basically, the Motion to Dismiss is sending the following message to cruise line passengers:
"WE DON'T GIVE A DAMN WHAT HAPPENS TO YOU WHILE YOU ARE ONBOARD OUR SHIPS JUST AS LONG AS YOU SPEND PLENTY OF MONEY, AND WE DON'T GIVE A FLYING HOOT WHETHER YOU [OUR PASSENGER] ARE RIPPED OFF BY OUR CONCESSIONAIRES. WE AREN'T RESPONSIBLE AND WE WILL NOT BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE TO YOU [OUR PASSENGER] AT ANY TIME NOW OR IN THE FUTURE. DIDN'T YOU IDIOTS READ YOUR CRUISE TICKET?! OH, YOU HAVEN'T? WELL TOO BAD FOR YOU. GO POUND SAND! THANKS FOR YOUR BUSINESS AND HAVE A NICE DAY."
The cruise-going public should know how little the cruise lines apparently care for anything but the bottom line - the almighty dollar. A strong message must be sent that, without consumers, the cruise lines are sunk and that consumers are sick to death of being ripped off and taken advantage of. Indubitably, anyone who is considering a cruise these days needs a lawyer to review the "Cruise Ticket Contract" before embarking or risk being fed to the wolves later if any passenger ever finds himself in the position of having to file a legal claim or claims against the cruise line on which he sails and especially as it relates to the sale of artwork.
The Royal Caribbean and Celebrity Cruise Ticket Contract
Let's take a look at what Royal Caribbean and Celebrity say about their "cruise ticket" and the terms and conditions they are relying on to resist accountability:
"Plaintiffs' [Bohm and Lee] relationship with Celebrity is governed by the terms of their cruise ticket contract. Section 11 of the Ticket Contract contains a mandatory forum selection clause requiring Plaintiffs to litigate their claims in Miami, Florida."
Then Royal Caribbean and Celebrity cite for the Court exactly what the cruise ticket contract states which is the "gotcha" language that the Plaintiffs, they say, weren’t smart enough to read before setting sail or before filing suit. The cruise ticket terms read:
"IT IS AGREED BY AND BETWEEN PASSENGER AND CARRIERS THAT ALL DISPUTES AND MATTERS WHATSOEVER ARISING UNDER, IN CONNECTION WITH OR INCIDENT TO THIS CONTRACT SHALL BE LITIGATED, IF AT ALL, IN AND BEFORE A COURT LOCATED IN MIAMI, FLORIDA, U.S.A. TO THE EXCLUSION OF THE COURTS OF ANY OTHER STATE, TERRITORY OR COUNTRY. PASSENGER HEREBY WAIVES ANY VENUE OR OTHER OBJECTION THAT HE MAY HAVE TO ANY SUCH ACTION OR PROCEEDING BEING BROUGHT IN ANY COURT LOCATED IN MIAMI, FLORIDA."
The phrase emphasized above, "IF AT ALL" is very much operative here and pretty much tells it like it is. It is exactly what Royal Caribbean and Celebrity intend. That no one be successful litigating against them anywhere at any time in the U.S. and if any litigation is instituted it must be brought in a forum they so choose which favors them and NOT YOU, THE PASSENGER. In other words, the scales are not balanced - not by a long shot. The laws in Florida heavily favor the cruise lines and Park West Gallery.
The Motion to Dismiss filed by Royal Caribbean and Celebrity is a warning to all people who have or are thinking about buying a cruise ticket. It is insulting to the intelligence of those who would spend their hard earned money on a cruise. Know your rights before you invest in a cruise vacation and definitely before you embark. Call your travel agent and ask for the cruise line's terms and conditions BEFORE YOU SAIL. And if you plan on attending art auctions while on board ship and buying artwork, caveat emptor!
Cruise line companies are, for the most part, foreign corporations, and the cards are stacked against you if you think you have any say should something go wrong on your cruise. The cruise lines are specifically set up to escape liability. Let's say you purchase a piece of artwork from the art vendor aboard ship and that artwork is grossly misrepresented, fake, or bears a forged signature. The cruise lines say you are screwed. Why? Because they say the sale occurred in maritime waters - never while the ship is docked at port and never while the ship is docked in U.S. waters. It's quite a set-up when you consider how the game is played.
Art Auctions at Sea Are Not Maritime Activities
If Royal Caribbean and Celebrity are successful in their Motion and the court orders that Messrs. Bohm and Lee litigate their claims against the cruise lines in Florida, the next logical step for Royal Caribbean and Celebrity will be to file a Motion to Dismiss in the Florida forum, claiming that the Plaintiffs were in maritime waters during the time that Park West Gallery auctioned the artwork and therefore maritime law applies, barring the Plaintiffs from recovery. Royal Caribbean and Celebrity foreshadow this inevitable course in their current Motion without stating it specifically. So as far as Fine Art Registry is concerned, we may just as well address the issue of ship board art auctions as a maritime activity now for all cruise line passengers past, present, and future that have claims or may have claims against Park West Gallery and the cruise lines in the future for the sale of artwork that was or may have been fraudulently misrepresented, forged, or faked.
Royal Caribbean and Celebrity state in their Motion the following:
"A cruise line passage contract is a maritime contract governed by federal maritime law."
Really? That's not the way we see it, at least not as it relates to the sale of artwork at auction onboard ship. Consider this:
- The auctioning of art on the high seas is similar to a sale of goods, and therefore is not a maritime contract.
- Art auctions are not "necessary" or "essential" in any way to the operation of the ship or vessel.
Despite all the emphasis that Royal Caribbean and Celebrity puts on the "cruise ticket contract", the fact of the matter is the contract between you and the cruise line "must pertain directly to and be necessary for commerce or navigation upon navigable waters" in order for the contract to be grounded in maritime law.
Fine Art Registry would like to see Royal Caribbean and Celebrity or any other cruise line effectively prevail on the argument that a vendor's [Park West Gallery's] right to sell art onboard their cruise ships is indeed "necessary" for the operation of any of its vessels. The criterion of the agreement or contract between the passengers Bohm and Lee and Royal Caribbean and Celebrity does NOT relate to the carriage of goods at sea. It certainly does NOT relate to navigation of any ship. It definitely does NOT involve the sale of parts or repairs to a ship and as far as we know, not a single one of the cruise passengers who also happen to be victims of Park West Gallery (such as Messrs. Bohm and Lee) are seamen. Accordingly, the sale of artwork to cruise passengers by Park West Gallery HAS NO CONNECTION WHATSOEVER TO MARITIME COMMERCE.
Cruise ships operated long before art concession agreements were developed and since then many cruise ships and cruise lines have operated without on-board art concessions. In fact, there are cruise lines that operate with no art auction activity on board at all. In reality, it was only a little over a decade ago that Park West Gallery started operating aboard cruise ships. Presumably Royal Caribbean and Celebrity were cruising long before Park West Gallery or any other art vendor came along and long before any cruise ship art auctions were ever offered. In fact, for over 200 years ships have been successfully operating WITHOUT art auctions and have managed dandily.
While Royal Caribbean and Celebrity may think it is important to its bottom line to require the presence of art vendors like Park West Gallery, it certainly is NOT essential to conduct art auctions in order to navigate a ship or to protect any aspect of maritime commerce. So, please, cruise line companies, give us all a giant break from this weak and pathetic argument that you are sure to trumpet in the near future to the detriment of many a victim or Plaintiff that has or will have crossed paths with the self-proclaimed largest art gallery in the land onboard your cruise ships.
In summary, there is no relationship to traditional maritime activity in any way, shape or form when it comes to Park West Gallery sales aboard cruise ships. Royal Caribbean and Celebrity provides a venue for Park West Gallery, but none of the claims made by Plaintiffs in the class action litigation or any other litigation for that matter against the cruise lines and Park West Gallery have anything whatsoever to do with "traditional maritime activity." And U.S. District Court Judge James Lawrence King for the Southern District of Florida agreed in NCL (Bahamas) [Norwegian Cruise Lines], Ltd. v. Fine Art of Cruising, Ltd., finding:
"Federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over admiralty matters. 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1333. Both parties agree that admiralty jurisdiction exists only if a contract is wholly maritime in nature and its non-maritime elements are insignificant. To be maritime in nature an agreement must pertain directly to and be necessary for commerce or navigation. Also, while an activity covered by a contract may be important to a ship's operation, admiralty jurisdiction is conferred only if the activity is in fact 'necessary' to the operation of the vessel.
Here, the subject matter of the [Art] Concessionaire Agreement is not maritime in nature. An agreement granting the right to conduct art auctions aboard a ship is arguably not important to a ship's operation and is certainly not 'necessary' to the navigation of a vessel. Additionally, a contract to provide art auctions aboard a ship does not pertain directly to the maritime commerce engaged in by a cruise line and is unrelated to the ship's operation."
Read Judge King's Order in its entirety.
A Blind Eye and Silence from the Cruise Lines ~ Logical Suppositions Drawn
It is the cruise lines that drive the profit margins for their art concessionaires like Park West Gallery and it is the cruise lines that continue to allow the sale of spurious artwork to continue with no checks and balances in place and seemingly no accountability to its passengers who implicitly trust in the brand name of the cruise line on which they sail. The cruise lines Royal Caribbean and Celebrity are well aware of the specifics of what has been going on aboard their ships with its vendor Park West Gallery for a long time now but as far as Fine Art Registry knows, have made absolutely no effort to investigate Park West Gallery’s bad business practices. Accordingly, based on Royal Caribbean and Celebrity’s complete silence on the subject of art auction rip offs (save the legal wrangling that Park West Gallery has managed to drag the cruise lines into), the hundreds of victims that have come forward, the two and a half year investigation Fine Art Registry has performed, in addition to numerous other reports from victims on web sites like ripoffreport.com, pissedoffconsumer.com, and other online cruise blogs and forum web sites, there are a number of seemingly logical suppositions that can be drawn and contemplated, which are:
It has been reported to Fine Art Registry by knowledgeable insiders that Royal Caribbean's contract with Park West Gallery expires in May 2010. Presumably, Royal Caribbean is waiting eagerly for just that. The logical question is: why would any cruise line concerned with the strength and integrity of its brand name delay until May 2010 for contracts to expire in light of the mountain of evidence of fraud and deceptive trade practices concerning their shipboard art auction vendor? You have to consider the enormous financial exposure for Royal Caribbean and Celebrity if they were to terminate Park West Gallery even though they have a duty to mitigate (or diminish) damages or potential damages to passengers. Since profits are priority to the cruise lines (see quote at the beginning of this article), if Royal Caribbean and/or Celebrity were to terminate its contract(s) with Park West Gallery now or if it had in the past, it is almost a foregone conclusion that Park West Gallery would have immediately sued the cruise lines for breach of contract, calling further attention to the ongoing problem, and potentially resulting in a huge increase in the number of victims and intense scrutiny from the media. No, that wouldn't be good for the cruise lines - can't have that.
Further, in terminating the Park West Gallery contract, Royal Caribbean and/or Celebrity would be in the untenable position of all but admitting that Park West Gallery was indeed defrauding passengers. This would mean that the cruise lines would likely then be on the hook to Park West Gallery for breach of contract damages in addition to refunding many thousands and thousands of passengers who may have purchased spurious artwork from Park West Gallery in the past, and especially as it relates to the forged Dali prints - not to mention the Rembrandts and other misrepresented artwork that may have been sold over the last decade or more. It would suddenly become a loss of revenue nightmare for the cruise lines, not to mention the complex litigation that would no doubt immediately ensue.
In sum, terminating the Park West Gallery contract would not be a good option right now for the cruise lines based on the above scenario, though Fine Art Registry has asked many, many times why the cruise lines allow this fiasco of a disaster to continue. We can only guess that a blind eye is turned in favor of greed and fear of loss.
So, what do Royal Caribbean and Celebrity do? They wait it out, of course. Allow the contracts with Park West Gallery to expire and move on! This way the cruise lines dodge a couple of bullets or so they may believe, a breach of contract action by Park West Gallery and at the same time gain additional revenue by allowing Park West Gallery to continue selling aboard their cruise ships, knowing that in May 2010 when the contract expires, they might just be off the hook. This would all be well and good IF Royal Caribbean and Celebrity weren't already on notice (since at least June of 2008 if not before) of the alleged fraud that is occurring and has been occurring on their ships. Royal Caribbean Cruise Line, at the very least, knows full well that Fine Art Registry has documentary evidence (they just don't know how much), yet to be revealed to the public, that shows the gross level to which Royal Caribbean was made aware of the spurious and fraudulent Dali pieces that were being sold by Park West Gallery on land and at sea.
Moreover, it has been reported to Fine Art Registry by a reliable inside source that Royal Caribbean has knowledge concerning the little problem that Princess Cruise Lines had some years ago. Princess (to its credit) voluntarily refunded millions and millions of dollars to their customers (passengers) for the sale of fake Picasso works of art sold by a concessionaire similar to Park West Gallery. It was reported to FAR® that Princess took the time to phone every customer who had purchased the fake Picasso pieces and informed them about the recall. But that’s another story for a different day. Make no mistake about it. Royal Caribbean and Celebrity know exactly what happened in the case of the fake Picassos sold to Princess passengers and the chunk of substantial change that was refunded for the fakes. Royal Caribbean and Celebrity are probably well aware or should realize that this very same thing could happen to them - but on a much, much larger scale, potentially as much as hundreds of millions of dollars over the course of 13 years that Park West Gallery has been operating with the cruise lines' full blessing and benefiting significantly from a percentage of the Park West Gallery profits along the way - a percentage bar that is set by the cruise lines. The longer the cruise lines allow spurious artwork to be sold aboard their cruise ships, the grander the total sum of the refunds will be and the worse it will be for the cruise industry, not to mention the art industry in the end.
The Fine Art of Cruising - A Case Study in Understanding the Mentality of the Cruise Line Industry
Fine Art Registry HIGHLY recommends reading the other informative and instructive pleadings and legal memoranda filed by The Fine Art of Cruising in NCL (Bahamas) Ltd. v. Fine Art of Cruising, Ltd., as it is scandalous insight into the warped world of cruise lines and the sheer greed that drives them. The Fine Art of Cruising's Answer and Counterclaim against Norwegian Cruise Line is published here in its entirety and is worth the read. We have also published additional legal pleadings associated with this case for our readers' convenience. Law firms and lawyers can easily access these public documents themselves online.
To illustrate how arrogant the cruise lines can be and how their profits are the first order of priority, not the satisfaction of passengers - we offer just a few examples from the Exhibits filed with the Florida District Court in support of The Fine Art of Cruising's counterclaim. In a study of this case, it is obvious that Norwegian was attempting to squeeze out the principled art concessionaire, The Fine Art of Cruising in favor of replacing it with Park West Gallery whose business practices are more in line with the skewed Norwegian mentality of "numbers" and "profits" first - people second. It should be noted that Park West Gallery is currently operating onboard Norwegian cruise ships as well as Royal Caribbean, Celebrity and Carnival, among others.
See Exhibit B to the Fine Art of Cruising Counterclaim
An email dated August 8, 2006 from Colin Murphy, VP Air/Land Services at Norwegian Cruise Line is sent to a principal of the art concessionaire company, The Fine Art of Cruising, concerning what they would have to guarantee to Norwegian to be invited onboard Norwegian ships as art concessionaire, making specific mention of Park West Gallery's $5 million dollars of front money. The Revenue Share for Norwegian was to be a whopping 35% plus a 2% surcharge with additional revenues as set forth in the attached exhibits. If this isn't an eye opener to just how much the cruise lines are up to their necks in conspiracy with Park West Gallery as it relates to benefiting significantly from concessionaire agreements, we don't know what is.
The email reads in pertinent part:
"Guarantee
The numbers included in my proposal were based on what Park West had offered us previously. (They also offered $5m upfront!)
I am at home without access to my files but I believe we are expecting something in the region of 9 million passenger days next year. Capping the guarantee at $8.5 million would mean an effective PPD guarantee of around $0.95. This is not close to what we know we could get from Park West. Hossam and I had discussed the $1.50 and $1.00 numbers before and I am surprised this is not apparently an issue. As you know, my best case scenario is to get you on our ships, but not at any price!"
***
A response to the above from The Fine Art of Cruising, regarding the aggressive nature of the profit percentages being demanded by Norwegian, quoted in part:
"Commission of 35% is aggressive but will be accepted provided the 2% surcharge is included in it.
The minimum guarantee is capped at $8.5 million per year."
See Exhibit C to the Fine Art of Cruising Counterclaim
The next exhibit is the Norwegian Cruise Line Term Sheet which sets forth the substantial revenue percentages that Norwegian Cruise Line would make from the sale of artwork aboard their ships. The percentages earned by other cruise lines from Park West Gallery sales are similar and have been reported to Fine Art Registry by various insiders. Interestingly, in addition to the revenue percentages, Norwegian would be taking another commission on top for works of art that sold for $100,000 or more. Note that Park West Gallery frequently conducts what it bills as "VIP" auctions aboard cruise ships as well as on land. These are usually by invitation only and are all expense paid trips for cruise passengers where sometimes millions of dollars worth of art is sold in one auction setting. In order to be invited to a Park West Gallery "VIP" event, one would have already spent a considerable sum with them.
The Term Sheet reads in part:
"1. Revenue share will be 35%
Individual pieces in excess of $100,000 will be subject to a separate commission rate to be agreed in advance by both parties.
Fine Art of Cruising will contribute up to $50,000 per vessel for art gallery improvements; to be mutually agreed with NCL depending on space allocated to the onboard gallery."
It's very interesting to note that the Term Sheet suggests a solid joint venture (or cooperative) agreement between the cruise line and its art concessionaire - discussion of contributions to improve the art gallery aboard ship is indeed interesting. It certainly seems like much more than a casual - "we'll-lease-you-space-for-a-small-fee" situation as the cruise lines would like everyone to believe.
See Exhibit F to the Fine Art of Cruising Counterclaim
The following email written by Norwegian VP Colin Murphy to a principal of The Fine Art of Cruising is probably one of the most flagrant and disgusting emails we have discovered in our multi-year investigation. It's hard to believe that it is written by a cruise line executive. What's even harder to believe is that this guy is still employed with Norwegian after he clearly bites the hand that feeds him. It is instructive to show what ends these cruise execs will go to in satisfying their thirst for greed:
"Sending this from my personal mailbox for obvious reasons. Hopefully no one else reads your emails?
As I mentioned, I met with the other group interested in working with me. Their plans are pretty much complete and I am at a point where I need to make a decision very soon. As discussed, I have a great job at NCL and could quite easily stay here for the remainder of my career. However, I am increasingly frustrated at barriers the company puts up that stop me from getting things done. The cost of working for a large company I suppose.
I always enjoy our conversations and listening to your plans. You certainly have some big ideas! However our talks have all been petty vague and we will need to get into the details.
Regarding my financial package. I have a very good package at NCL and I would not be inexpensive. My cash compensation will be around $250K including the usual bonus, plus a nice fully expensed car, 401K, MERP, SERP, free vacations, etc etc.
We have a lot to discuss and it may be worthwhile if we can chat on the telephone before dinner on Monday or perhaps we could meet before then? In the meantime I thought it worthwhile to get my thoughts on the table.
Give me a call when you have a moment."
See Exhibit G to the Fine Art of Cruising Counterclaim
The next whopper of an email is written by Norwegian's Assistant Hotel Director, Jamie Petts to Shannon McKee (Norwegian Cruise Director) and copied to the Norwegian's VP Colin Murphy who wrote the horrific email above and David Cain, Director, Onboard Revenue at Norwegian Cruise Line, in part:
"In the past this ship (Norwegian Dawn) was averaging about $100,000 a voyage and even broke over $200,000. We would like to see some lower to mid range pieces to match the demographics of the guests. These would also help the auctions become livelier. The [Fine] Art of cruising are sticking to a very principled style of selling which is great but without the fake bidding, it is making the auctions a bit flat."
This is yet another unconscionable and downright nauseating email exchange and is just one more example of business as usual with the cruise lines. Obviously, Norwegian is used to Park West Gallery's business practices. Unbelievable!
See Exhibit S to the Fine Art of Cruising Counterclaim
The following are the Guarantees that NCL required of The Fine Art of Cruising for future profits in artwork sold aboard their ships. These are amounts guaranteed to NCL no matter what. Pretty steep.
"Guarantees
2008 $8 million
2009 $9 million
2010 $10 million
2011 $11 million
2012 $12 million"
Exhibit T to the Fine Art of Cruising Counterclaim
This is a letter, dated July 30, 2007, written by a principal of The Fine Art of Cruising to Colin Veitch, President and CEO of NCL Corporation regarding NCL's breach of contract. The letter clearly reveals the "partnership" between cruise lines and its art concessionaire. We quote in part, the following:
"As we embarked on a true partnership with NCL our aim and vision was to create a new industry standard where our ethical practices would be appreciated and nurtured. Unlike prior operators on NCL, FAOC does not subscribe to practices such as inflating the retail or 'in-house bidding'. These are practices that were being implemented onboard to achieve higher revenues. Several hotel directors communicated with us in order to commend us on our highly ethical approach given that they had observed what transpired before."
As a final comment, paragraph 130 of The Fine Art of Cruising Counterclaim speaks for itself at page 29 of 42 of the pleading. William Hamlin, Executive VP of NCL Fleet Operations communicates his bottom line to the principal of The Fine Art of Cruising. It simply doesn't get any more outrageous than this.
"...Hamlin made his point clear that NCL's only interest was to maximize its financial position.... Hossam, I don't give a f**k where the money comes from. We have a number to make and, however it's made, it has to be made."
On October 26, 2009, the Honorable Robert S. Lasnik, entered an Order Setting Trial & Related Dates for the Blackman, Bouverat, Bohm and Hatter nationwide class action litigation against Park West Gallery. Judge Lasnik also DENIED Royal Caribbean's Motion to Dismiss without prejudice.
It's high time that all the cruise lines take responsibility and be held accountable for their failure to act in a responsible manner as it relates to allowing cruise ship art concessionaires to take advantage, gouge, misrepresent, and generally rip off the unsuspecting public all in the name of their precious bottom line.
Park West Gallery Litigation Updates
- Park West Gallery and its Astounding Experts and Legal Contortionists
- Park West Gallery Caught Between a Rock and a Hard Place?
- Park West Gallery Hornet's Nest of Litigation, Update on Nationwide Class Actions
- Do Bernie Ewell or his Lawyer Have a Clue?
- Park West Gallery Up Against the Ropes and More Remarkable Developments
- Park West Gallery Lawyers' Hasty Court Filing Throws Open Pandora's Box
- Park West Gallery Drags Royal Caribbean into Its Cesspit of Controversy
- Corruption, Manipulation, Deceit and Worthless Park West Gallery Appraisals
- Michigan Court Judge Enters Multiple Formal Judgments Against Park West Gallery
- Michigan Court of Appeals Spanks Royal Caribbean - AGAIN!
- Six Blistering Amended Complaints Filed Against Park West Gallery and Accomplices
- Fine Art Registry® to Square Off with Park West Gallery in Port Huron, Michigan
New Video Series of Litigation Updates
Fine Art Registry® invites you to tune into a series of new videos featuring CEO and Founder Teri Franks as she confronts the self-proclaimed "World's Largest Art Gallery" Park West Gallery. Brought to you as it happens! Be sure to stay tuned to the cliff hanger sequences.
Fine Art Registry Video - Intro to New Video Series of Litigation Updates
- Litigation Update #13, Video Series
- Part 1 - "Bury the Truth", Park West Gallery Style
- Part 2 - Park West's Motion in Limine 1 and 2
- Part 3 - News Flash! Court Order on Park West's Emergency Motion to Compel
- Part 4 - Park West's Motion in Limine 3 through 10
- Part 5 - "In Defense of Truth" Affidavit of CEO Teri Franks vs. Park West Gallery
- Part 6 - Park West's Motion in Limine 11 through 17
- Part 7 - "Oh the Drama"
- Part 8 - "It's An Eye Opener"
- Part 9 - "Peeling the Onion"
- Part 10 - Fine Art Registry Responds to Limine #12, Part 1
- Part 11 - Fine Art Registry Responds to Limine #12, Part 2
- Part 12 - Park West files Another Motion to Silence Fine Art Registry
- Part 13 - Park West enters into a game of "Dirty Pool"
- Part 14 - Outrageous Conduct Exhibited by Park West Attorneys
- Part 15 - Letter from Fed's and "Grand Jury Investigation"
- Litigation Update #14, Video: Jury Trial in Michigan Begins
- Litigation Update #15, Video: Michigan Trial - Day 4, Scaglione takes the Stand
- Litigation Update #16, Video: Michigan Trial - Day 5, Fine Art Registry is Alive, Well and Still Fighting
- Litigation Update #17, Video: Michigan Trial - Weekend Update
- Litigation Update #18, Video: Michigan Trial - Albert Molina to Take the Stand Soon
- Litigation Update #19, Video: Michigan Trial - Half Truths and Perverted Truths
- Litigation Update #20, Video: Michigan Trial - Coming to the Stand Bob Wittman
- Litigation Update #21, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 6 - How Provenance Relates to Artwork - Part 1
- Litigation Update #22, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 6 - How Provenance Relates to Artwork - Part 2
- Litigation Update #23, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 7- Albert Molina-Lies! Payoffs! Gross Distortions!- Part 1
- Litigation Update #24, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 7- Testimony of Park West VIP Customer "Backfires" - Part 2
- Litigation Update #25, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 8 - "Shady" European Sources of PWG Dali Prints
- Litigation Update #26, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 9 - Purported Signatures of Salvador Dali and Manufactured Blind Stamp-Part 1
- Litigation Update #27, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 9 - Park West Gallery Up to Its Old Tricks-Part 2
- Litigation Update #28, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 9 - Book Entitled ART CRIME Exposes Glaring Similarities to PWG Dali Provenance-Part 3
- Litigation Update #29, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Weekend Update 3/28/10 - Revealing Emails from Park West Gallery Ex-Auctioneers - Part 1
- Litigation Update #30, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Weekend Update 3/28/10 - Raffle Art Deception Exposed by PWG Ex-Cruise Ship Auctioneer -Part 2
- Litigation Update #31, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 10 - PWG Relies on Status of Ex-FBI Employee-Bob Wittman - Part 1
- Litigation Update #32, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 10 - Bob Wittman Handed Keys to Park West Gallery Kingdom - Part 2
- Litigation Update #33, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 11 and 12 - Hostile Witness Called!
- Litigation Update #34, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 13 - PWG "Star Witness" Bernard Ewell His Blog and Infamous Posts-Part 1
- Litigation Update #35, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 13- Park West Gallery "Expert" Ewell Puts on Spectacle(s) in Court - Part 2
- Litigation Update #36, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 14 - Park West Gallery Presents: A Drama, Starring; Mary Gordon and Cast - Part 1
- Litigation Update #37, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 14 - Another Hostile Witness - Publications Director, David Phillips - Part 2
- Litigation Update #38, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 15 - Park West Damage Expert Simon Says: $46,000,000.00 In Damages! OUTRAGEOUS!!
- Litigation Update #39, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 15, Part 2 - Park West Gallery Sandpapers, Varnishes and Glosses Over Provenance
- Litigation Update #40, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 16, Part 1 - Park West Gallery Rests its Case! An Anti-climax!!
- Litigation Update #41, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 16, Part 2 - Introducing World Renowned Dali Expert, Nicolas Descharnes from Paris
- Litigation Update #42, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 17, Part 1 - Park West Gallery Victim, Debbie Austin Testifies for Fine Art Registry
- Litigation Update #43, Video: Michigan Jury Trial-Day 17, Part 2 - Object To This! Object To That! Object To Everything! Especially The TRUTH!!
- Michigan Jury Trial-Day 19 - Three World Renowned Experts "Agree" PWG Dali Inventory Examined Prints "FORGED"
- Michigan Jury Trial-Day 18 - Conversation With Fine Art Registry CEO and Dali Experts
- Michigan Jury Trial-Day 20 - Park West Gallery and Counsel Laugh At Victims' Compelling Testimony! Where Are The Ethics???
- Michigan Jury Trial-Week End Update 4/10/2010 - "How To Get Flim-Flammed At Sea" Told by PWG Ex-Auctioneers
- Michigan Jury Trial-Week End Update 4/10/2010 Part 2 - "Send In The Clowns" & The Rest of Rouges Gallery!
- Michigan Jury Trial-Week End Update 4/10/2010 Part 3 - Fine Art Registry Beginning 5th Week of Historic Art Trial
- Michigan Jury Trial-Day 21 - PWG Required Victim to Pay $26,000.00 In Money Orders for Art Purchased! - What???
- Michigan Jury Trial-Day 22 - CEO Teri Franks Takes the Stand! "LET R' RIP"
- Michigan Jury Trial - Day 23 - Fine Art Registry CEO Teri Franks Stands Her Ground!
- Michigan Jury Trial - Day 24 - War Zone! Witnesses Testify of Park West Gallery Collateral Damage - Part 1
- Michigan Jury Trial - Day 24 - Fine Art Registry Witness: Samantha Algar "There's A Point in Life Where You Have to Do The Right Thing!" - Part 2
- Michigan Jury Trial - Day 24 - Sharon Day - PWG Victim Defrauded of Close to Half Million Dollars! - Part 3
- Michigan Jury Trial - Day 24 - PWG Albert Scaglione Leaves Courtroom BEFORE Sharon Day Takes Stand! - Part 4
- Michigan Jury Trial - Day 24 - Penny Tyler Exposes PWG Auctioneer Training on Land and Sea - Part 5
- Michigan Jury Trial - Day 24 - Park West Gallery's Ex-Auctioneer & Former Trainee Speak Out! - Part 6
- Michigan Jury Trial - Day 25 - We've Had Our Day In Court - FAR® Case Concluded! - Part 1
- Michigan Jury Trial - Day 25 - Auctioneer Trainee for Park West Gallery DISMISSED! "Too Much Art Knowledge"
- Michigan Jury Trial - Weekend Update 4/17/2010 - Divine Providence Allows Sharon Day to Testify for FAR®!
- Michigan Jury Trial - Weekend Update 4/17/2010 - Sharon Day: "Without Fine Art Registry Where Would We Be?"
- Michigan Jury Trial - Weekend Update 4/17/2010 - Park West Gallery Fabricates Bogus Invoice for Sharon Day and Julian Howard - Part 3
- Michigan Jury Trial - Weekend Update 4/17/2010 - "Buyer Beware Does Not Apply to Fraud" Sharon Day - Part 4
- Michigan Jury Trial - Weekend Update 4/17/2010 - "That Little Plywood Box" Was Owned by PANDORA! - Part 5
- Michigan Jury Trial - Weekend Update 4/18/2010 - Fine Art Registry Witness PWG Ex-Employee Lynn Mesrobian Testifies to Oppressive Work Atmosphere - Part 6
- Michigan Jury Trial - Weekend Update 4/18/2010 - Park West Gallery's Un-Limited Editions - Run Out? - Simply Print More! - Part 7
- Michigan Jury Trial - Day 26 - We've Run the Race and Fought the Good Fight! - Jury Deliberates! Part 1
- Michigan Jury Trial - Day 26 - Samantha Algar: Describes Court Proceedings Metaphorically - Part 2
- Michigan Jury Trial - Day 26 - Sharon Day Back By Popular Demand - Part 3
- Michigan Jury Trial - Day 26 - PWG Closing Argument.... Never Mentioned Defrauded Victims Who Testified - Part 4
- Michigan Jury Trial - Day 27 - Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines Enables Park West Gallery Corruption to Continue!
- Michigan Jury Trial - Day 27 - Historic Art Case! WE WON AND WE WON BIG!!
- Michigan Jury Trial - Day 27 - Victorious and Homeward Bound!
- Michigan Post Jury Trial - 4-22-2010 - Fine Art Registry® CEO Speaks With Her Legal Team: Donald Payton and Jonathan Schwartz of Kaufman, Payton and Chapa P.C.
New Post Trial Video Series: Truth to Power
— by Fine Art Registry®
| October 31, 2009
Discuss on FAR® Forum
|
Print
|
Fine Art News Feed
View all Articles
