Quote:
Originally Posted by STLUCIE
Would you feel the same about a million-dollar Rembrandt that was lost in a theft? We'll see what a judge or jury says and I will be glad to share their ruling. Pain and suffering is a stretch but I will mention it to the attorneys.
|
Exactly my point about a garage queen.
If a Rembrandt disappears from a museum all that can be claimed for loss of use is unrealized revenue from traffic that didn't come to the museum because the Rembrandt is no longer there.
However, if the Rembrandt were in a sealed vault in the basement of a collector, and the painting is stolen and moved to another sealed vault, there is no real measurable loss of use because there was never any measurable revenue producing use. Mental pleasure, yes.
Oh, and it was mentioned that this was not operable? How "inoperable" was it? If it couldn't be driven there is even less of a case for use. And since all she ever had was a piece of paper discovered years later, there is even less of a nexus to be able to claim use that could be lost.
This whole thing sounds to me like it is being built on a house of cards by a bunch of lawyers that took a case on contengency. Sure hope you're submitting billable hours weekly.