Uploaded March 2025 | Updated September 2026, 3 weeks ago
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 42,700 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 988 casebooks ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Al Hirschfeld Foundation v. Margo Feiden Galleries Ltd.
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
296 F. Supp. 3d 627 (2017)
Not all breaches of contract are equal. Some are more egregious than others. And in Al Hirschfeld Foundation versus Margot Feiden Galleries Limited, we explore how egregious a breach must be to allow the non breaching party to terminate its own performance of its contractual obligations.
Renowned cartoonist, Al Hirschfeld, had a long standing business relationship with Margot Feiden and the Margot Feiden Galleries, collectively the galleries, which he licensed to represent him. When a dispute arose, Hirschfeld and the galleries entered a settlement agreement that governed the party's relationship. That agreement was in effect at Hirschfeld's death in two thousand three, and the Al Hirschfeld Foundation then replaced Hirschfeld as a party. The agreement appointed the galleries as the exclusive representative for the sale of certain originals, previously commissioned works, and photostatic reproductions.
The galleries were also the exclusive representative for the licensing of certain reproductions and were authorized to produce a fixed number of limited edition prints each year.
The foundation retained all rights not expressly granted to the galleries, including the copyrights to Hirschfeld's works. The foundation could also terminate the agreement by giving the galleries ninety days notice of a material breach that remained uncured for thirty days once the galleries received notice.
The foundation sued the galleries in June of twenty sixteen, alleging multiple breaches of the agreement and simultaneously gave the galleries notice of termination.
Among other things, the foundation presented evidence that the galleries were producing and selling giclee prints, meaning high quality photostatic reproductions, without authorization, and had also lost twenty original works that were entrusted to them. After the ninety day notice window expired, the foundation terminated the agreement and sought summary judgment in the legal proceeding declaring that the termination was valid.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: quimbee.com/cases/al-hirschfeld-foundation-v-margo-feiden-galleries-ltd
The Quimbee App features over 42,700 case briefs keyed to 988 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: quimbee.com/cases/al-hirschfeld-foundation-v-margo-feiden-galleries-ltd
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► facebook.com/quimbeedotcom
Twitter ► twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 42,700 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 988 casebooks ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Al Hirschfeld Foundation v. Margo Feiden Galleries Ltd.
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
296 F. Supp. 3d 627 (2017)
Not all breaches of contract are equal. Some are more egregious than others. And in Al Hirschfeld Foundation versus Margot Feiden Galleries Limited, we explore how egregious a breach must be to allow the non breaching party to terminate its own performance of its contractual obligations.
Renowned cartoonist, Al Hirschfeld, had a long standing business relationship with Margot Feiden and the Margot Feiden Galleries, collectively the galleries, which he licensed to represent him. When a dispute arose, Hirschfeld and the galleries entered a settlement agreement that governed the party's relationship. That agreement was in effect at Hirschfeld's death in two thousand three, and the Al Hirschfeld Foundation then replaced Hirschfeld as a party. The agreement appointed the galleries as the exclusive representative for the sale of certain originals, previously commissioned works, and photostatic reproductions.
The galleries were also the exclusive representative for the licensing of certain reproductions and were authorized to produce a fixed number of limited edition prints each year.
The foundation retained all rights not expressly granted to the galleries, including the copyrights to Hirschfeld's works. The foundation could also terminate the agreement by giving the galleries ninety days notice of a material breach that remained uncured for thirty days once the galleries received notice.
The foundation sued the galleries in June of twenty sixteen, alleging multiple breaches of the agreement and simultaneously gave the galleries notice of termination.
Among other things, the foundation presented evidence that the galleries were producing and selling giclee prints, meaning high quality photostatic reproductions, without authorization, and had also lost twenty original works that were entrusted to them. After the ninety day notice window expired, the foundation terminated the agreement and sought summary judgment in the legal proceeding declaring that the termination was valid.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: quimbee.com/cases/al-hirschfeld-foundation-v-margo-feiden-galleries-ltd
The Quimbee App features over 42,700 case briefs keyed to 988 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: quimbee.com/cases/al-hirschfeld-foundation-v-margo-feiden-galleries-ltd
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► facebook.com/quimbeedotcom
Twitter ► twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
