CaseStudy
BUSINESS LAW
ON CRIMES
A FAMILY OF ART DEALERS
Max imports paintings and sells them in his Los Angeles art gallery. He operates the gallery in partnership with his three sons, Allen, Burt, and Carl.
For years, Max has knowingly bought and resold paintings apparently stolen from small museums in Europe; however, Max has never told his sons about that some art was acquired through museum theft. Each of his sons, however, has suspected that many of the paintings were stolen.
One day Max and his sons picked up a piece sent from Ted, a source in London. Max had arranged to buy the painting recently stolen by Ted from a small British museum. Max believed the painting that they picked up was stolen, but he did not share his belief with his sons.
Having read an article about the museum and art theft, Allen also believed the painting was stolen. Allen did not share his belief with his brothers.
Burt actually knew about the theft of the painting by Ted. Without Max’s knowledge, Burt arranged for Ted to send Max a copy of the stolen painting and to retain the genuine painting for sale later – with Burt and Ted sharing the proceeds.
Max sold the copy of the art work to another dealer in San Francisco.
Carl regularly sold information about Max’s transactions to law enforcement agencies and continued to participate in the business for the sole purpose of continuing to deal with them.
Are Max, Allen, Burt, Carl, or Ted guilty of any crimes such as:
(a) conspiracy to receive stolen property?
(b) receipt of stolen property with respect to the copy of the stolen painting?
(c) attempt to receive stolen property with respect to the copy of the stolen painting?
(d) any other offenses?
What civil liabilities may have accrued?
Discuss your opinion.
DROP BOX WILL BE LOADED MONDAY.
A. I believe that Max, Burt and Ted are responsible for the crime of conspiring to receive stolen property. I came to this conclusion because these three people knew for a fact
ON CRIMES
A FAMILY OF ART DEALERS
Max imports paintings and sells them in his Los Angeles art gallery. He operates the gallery in partnership with his three sons, Allen, Burt, and Carl.
For years, Max has knowingly bought and resold paintings apparently stolen from small museums in Europe; however, Max has never told his sons about that some art was acquired through museum theft. Each of his sons, however, has suspected that many of the paintings were stolen.
One day Max and his sons picked up a piece sent from Ted, a source in London. Max had arranged to buy the painting recently stolen by Ted from a small British museum. Max believed the painting that they picked up was stolen, but he did not share his belief with his sons.
Having read an article about the museum and art theft, Allen also believed the painting was stolen. Allen did not share his belief with his brothers.
Burt actually knew about the theft of the painting by Ted. Without Max’s knowledge, Burt arranged for Ted to send Max a copy of the stolen painting and to retain the genuine painting for sale later – with Burt and Ted sharing the proceeds.
Max sold the copy of the art work to another dealer in San Francisco.
Carl regularly sold information about Max’s transactions to law enforcement agencies and continued to participate in the business for the sole purpose of continuing to deal with them.
Are Max, Allen, Burt, Carl, or Ted guilty of any crimes such as:
(a) conspiracy to receive stolen property?
(b) receipt of stolen property with respect to the copy of the stolen painting?
(c) attempt to receive stolen property with respect to the copy of the stolen painting?
(d) any other offenses?
What civil liabilities may have accrued?
Discuss your opinion.
DROP BOX WILL BE LOADED MONDAY.
A. I believe that Max, Burt and Ted are responsible for the crime of conspiring to receive stolen property. I came to this conclusion because these three people knew for a fact