Edward Hicks, "Peaceable Kingdom with the Leopard of Serenity,” 1846–1848, 26 by 29½ inches. The painting, which set a record for a work of American folk art at auction and a record for the artist at auction when it sold for $9.6 million in May at Sotheby's, is involved in a lawsuit filed by the auction house against the buyer for non-payment.
:A version of Edward Hicks' iconic "The Peaceable Kingdom" is again attracting anything but pacific vibes. "The Peaceable Kingdom With the Leopard of Serenity" by the American folk artist, which sold at Sotheby's on May 22 for a record $9.6 million, first created a stir when its owner, jeweler and collector Ralph O. Esmerian, snatched it back from the American Folk Art Museum earlier this year, where as a promised gift to the museum it had been on view since 2000. At the time, it was revealed that Esmerian needed to monetize some of his assets to pay off debts to Sotheby's, Christie's and Merrill Lynch.
The painting set a record for a work of American folk art at auction and a record for the artist at auction. It was also the highest price paid for a work of Americana at Sotheby's and the second highest price paid for a work of Americana at auction.
Now, Sotheby's is suing San Francisco-based art collector and CNet founder Halsey Minor, successful bidder for the Hicks painting, claiming that he has failed to pay the auction house for the painting and two others he purchased at the May sale. Included in the $16.8 million lawsuit filed in federal court here on September 2 is the $13.8 million Sotheby's claims he owes for the Hicks and the two other paintings, unnamed in the lawsuit, plus late fees, interest and damages.
Sotheby's spokesperson Diane Phillips confirmed in an e-mail that the three paintings were, as described in other press reports, Hicks' "Peaceable Kingdom," Andy Warhol's "Diamond Dust Shoes" and Childe Hassam's "Paris, Winter Days."
A September 4 article in The New York Times stated that Minor had told the auction house that he had not paid for the works because he was owed money by other parties.
That same news report said Minor claimed his reason he had not paid for the purchases had nothing to do with his financial wherewithal to do so, but was because Sotheby's had a financial stake in the painting's sale stemming from Esmerian's pledging it as collateral for a loan. Phillips stated, however, "Mr Minor never raised this issue in any of the conversations we had with him. He always said that he could not pay because he was owed money by others. He only raised this issue last Friday, once he knew the lawsuit was imminent. Sotheby's complies with all department of consumer affairs regulations regarding disclosure and we did so in this case."
The lawsuit charges that despite Sotheby's standing requirement for immediate payment following a sale, the firm initially offered Minor generous payment terms that would have allowed him until August to pay for the three paintings Such an arrangement is highly unusual, according to Phillips, who added, "It is highly unusual for us to sue a client. We do not like to sue our clients, but unfortunately Mr Minor left us with no choice."
