ARTINFO.com

Font Size Font Increase Font Decrease

The Salander Chronologies: The Earl Davis Case

By Andrew M. Goldstein

Published: October 31, 2007
NEW YORK—One of the most persistent allegations in the suits against Lawrence Salander is that he treated artworks in his care as fungible commodities, trading them for other pieces or using them to pay down debt while telling their owners that the works were away “on consignment.” Earl Davis, the son of the late painter Stuart Davis, supplied Salander with hundreds of works of art from his father’s estate over the course of two decades. While the dealer was expected to sell the pieces, part of the arrangement was that Davis had to approve of any sale, both to vet the price and have a last chance to keep the piece for his own collection. The following timeline, drawn from lawsuits, other court documents, and news reports, maps the disintegration of this relationship. (For an extensive timeline of Salander’s numerous ongoing court cases, click here. For details on the Roy Lennox case, click here.)

2005 – Noticing that the gallery is suffefring from what appears to be bookkeeping errors, Earl Davis asks Lawrence Salander for a full accounting of Davis's father's works. In December, after finding out that Salander had sold four important paintings without his permission, Davis tells the dealer to stop selling the works and return his art.

June 2006Lawrence Salander gives Earl Davis 24 post-dated checks, each for $222,083, to pay off acknowledged debt over two years; only three checks clear. Between this month and January 2007, Salander also returns to Davis 102 of the least valuable artworks, telling him that the majority of the remaining 124 pieces are out on consignment with museums or other dealers, and that four are missing. Around this time Salander convinces Davis to sell 13 paintings for a total of $2.9 million, saying he will receive the proceeds immediately. Davis never sees any of the money.

Oct. 2006Earl Davis learns that 12 of the works said to be on consignment had actually been sold, with two of them on exhibit at the Whitney Museum of American Art and listing other people as the owners. A court document states that when Davis confronted Lawrence Salander, the dealer “feigned surprise and stated that he would look into it.”

Dec, 2006 – After demanding that Lawrence Salander request the return of the artworks on consignment, Earl Davis finds out that the dealer has sent letters to only four people requesting the return of the works. When he tells Salander to send more letters, according to a court filing, the dealer threatens to “go on the attack” against Davis if he says anything to anyone that might jeopardize his reputation.

May 29, 2007Earl Davis sues Lawrence Salander for proceeds from the sales of his art, damages in the amount of at least $1 million apiece on five different counts, and the return of his remaining works. On July 17, Salander answers Davis's suit with a denial of every allegation.

Aug. 20, 2007Earl Davis files a memorandum with the court stating that most of the works Lawrence Salander said were away on consignment were actually sold for at least $9,378,875, and that other works were used as collateral for the dealer’s unrelated debts. About 25 works are unaccounted for. By this point the amount sought in the lawsuit has grown to $30 million.

Oct. 11, 2007 – The case is scheduled to go to trial beginning February 11, 2008.

Editor's Note: In the original version of “The Salander Chronologies,” published Wednesday, October 13, there were several inaccuracies that were clarified by Earl Davis and his lawyer, Dean Nicyper. In the main chronology and the Earl Davis chronology, it was stated that there was a delay "of several months" between when Davis requested an accounting of his father's works at the gallery in 2005 and when Lawrence Salander provided the accounting; in fact, there was no such delay. In the same entry, it was stated that there was a month between Davis's request that Salander stop selling the works and the request that the dealer return the art, when in fact both requests were made simultaneously. In the Davis Chronology, it was stated that Salander gave Davis 24 post-dated checks in 2007; in fact, Salander gave him the checks in 2006.
advertisements