Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Accent Delight International Ltd. v. Sotheby's and Sotheby's, Inc.

United States District Court, S.D. New York

January 3, 2020

ACCENT DELIGHT INTERNATIONAL LTD. and XITRANS FINANCE LTD., Plaintiffs,
v.
SOTHEBY'S and SOTHEBY'S, INC., Defendants.

          LETTER OF REQUEST FOR INTERNATIONAL JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE PURSUANT TO THE HAGUE CONVENTION OF 18 MARCH 1970 ON THE TAKING OF EVIDENCE ABROAD IN CIVIL MATTERS TO OBTAIN EVIDENCE FROM JEAN-MARC PERETTI

          HON. JESSE M. FURMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         In conformity with Articles 1 and 3 of the Hague Convention of 18 March 1970 on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters (the “Hague Convention”), the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York respectfully requests international judicial assistance to obtain evidence from Jean-Marc Peretti (“Mr. Peretti”) for use in the above-captioned civil proceeding currently pending before this Court (the “U.S. Action” or “Action”). The assistance requested is for the appropriate judicial authority of Switzerland to compel the appearance of Mr. Peretti to produce documents and give oral testimony relevant to the claims and defenses in the Action.

1. Sender/Requesting Judicial Authority:
The Honorable Jesse M. Furman United States District Court for the Southern District of New York 40 Centre Street, Room 2202 New York, New York 10007 United States of America
2. Central Authority of the Requested State:
Tribunal civil - Tribunal de première instance Rue de l'Athénée 6-8 Case postale 3736 1211 Genève 3
3. Persons to Whom the Executed Request Is to be Returned:
The Honorable Jesse M. Furman United States District Court for the Southern District of New York 40 Centre Street, Room 2202 New York, New York 10007 United States of America
4. Names and Addresses of the Parties and Their Representatives:
a. Plaintiffs:
Accent Delight International Ltd. Jipfa Building, 3rd Floor 142 Main Street Road Town, Tortola British Virgin Islands Xitrans Finance Ltd.
Akara Building 24 De Castro Street Wickhams Cay 1 Road Town Tortola British Virgin Islands
Counsel for Plaintiffs:
Daniel Kornstein Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady LLP 600 Fifth Avenue, 10th Floor New York, New York 10020 Email: dkornstein@ecbalaw.com Tel: 212 763 5000
Sandrine Giroud LALIVE Rue de la Mairie 35 P.O. Box 6569 1211 Geneva 6 Switzerland Email: sgiroud@lalive.law Tel: 58 105 2000
b. Defendants:
Sotheby's 1334 York Avenue New York, New York 10021 United States of America
Sotheby's, Inc. 1334 York Avenue New York, New York 10021 United States of America
Counsel for Defendants: Marcus A. Asner Sara L. Shudofsky Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP 250 West 55th Street New York, New York 10019 Email: Marcus.Asner@arnoldporter.com Email: Sara.Shudofsky@arnoldporter.com Tel: 212 836 7222
Saverio Lembo Aurélie Conrad Hari Bär & Karrer SA 12 quai de la Poste 1211 Geneva 11, Switzerland Email: Saverio.Lembo@BaerKarrer.ch Email: Aurelie.ConradHari@BaerKarrer.ch Tel: 58 261 57 00

         5. Nature of the Proceedings and Summary of the Facts:

         The U.S. Action is a civil proceeding in which Plaintiffs allege that Sotheby's and Sotheby's, Inc. (together, “Sotheby's”) aided and abetted an alleged fraud and breach of fiduciary duty committed by Yves Bouvier (“Mr. Bouvier”) and breached its contractual obligations to Plaintiffs. A copy of the Amended Complaint (“Am. Compl.”) and Sotheby's Answer (“Sotheby's Answer”) in the U.S. Action are attached hereto as Exhibits A and B.

         Plaintiffs' action arises from a longstanding dispute between Mr. Bouvier and Dmitry Rybolovlev (“Mr. Rybolovlev”), a Russian oligarch. Plaintiffs are companies incorporated in the British Virgin Islands; they are owned by trusts settled by and for the benefit of members of the family of Mr. Rybolovlev. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 5-6 [Exhibit A]. Mr. Rybolovlev is Plaintiffs' principal. Plaintiffs contend that Mr. Bouvier defrauded them of over one billion dollars when he served as their art advisor. Id. ¶ 2. Plaintiffs allege that Plaintiffs and Mr. Bouvier agreed (at a time and in a manner unspecified by Plaintiffs) that Mr. Bouvier would act as their agent to acquire art masterworks on their behalf. See Id. ¶ 14. Mr. Bouvier allegedly purchased 38 art masterworks from private sellers, resold the works to Plaintiffs at markups as high as 145%, and pocketed the difference for himself. Id. ¶ 2. Plaintiffs assert that Sotheby's aided and abetted Mr. Bouvier's alleged fraud and breach of fiduciary duty with respect to 14 of the art masterworks; Mr. Bouvier acquired 12 of those 14 art masterworks from third parties in private sales facilitated by Sotheby's entities before he sold them to Plaintiffs. See generally id.

         According to Plaintiffs, Mr. Peretti served as Mr. Bouvier's “associate” and participated in discussions regarding the art masterworks at issue in the Action. See Id. ¶ 30. Specifically, Plaintiffs contend that Mr. Peretti and Mr. Bouvier communicated with one another and with Sotheby's regarding works of art, the quality and importance of the works of art, and appraisals of some of the works. Id. Plaintiffs attempt to draw inferences about the tone and language used in such discussions to support their claim that Mr. Bouvier was acting on behalf of Plaintiffs in a fiduciary capacity. See, e.g., id. ¶ 94.

         In their response to Sotheby's interrogatories in this case, Plaintiffs have identified Mr. Peretti as having: (i) “knowledge or information concerning . . . the allegations in the Complaint”; (ii) “knowledge or information concerning any transaction involving one or more of the Works” at issue in the case; (iii) “knowledge or information concerning the alleged agency or fiduciary relationship between [Plaintiffs] and [Mr.] Bouvier”; (iv) “knowledge or information concerning the alleged fraud committed by [Mr.] Bouvier”; (v) “knowledge of any valuation that [Plaintiffs] obtained or attempted to obtain from [Mr.] Bouvier” concerning the artworks at issue; and (vi) “knowledge or information concerning [Plaintiffs'] alleged reliance on . . . appraisals . . . and other documents Sotheby's created for the[] [artworks].” Plaintiffs' Responses and Objections to Sotheby's First Set of Interrogatories at 4-6, attached hereto as Exhibit C (“Plaintiffs' Responses to Interrogatories”).[1] Mr. Peretti is therefore in unique possession of information regarding his interactions with Mr. Bouvier as well as Mr. Bouvier's interactions with Plaintiffs and Mr. Rybolovlev on issues that are critical to the claims and defenses in the U.S. Action.

         6. Evidence to be Obtained or Other Judicial Acts to be Performed:

         This Court seeks, by way of the present Letter of Request, oral testimony and documents from Mr. Peretti for use at trial. Appendix A sets forth the topics of oral testimony sought from Mr. Peretti.

         Mr. Peretti is a critical fact witness in the U.S. Action. Mr. Bouvier's and Mr. Peretti's interactions with Plaintiffs and Sotheby's are at the heart of Plaintiffs' U.S. Action against Sotheby's. Mr. Peretti is in unique possession of critical evidence that bears on the essential elements of Plaintiffs' claims and Sotheby's defenses to those claims.

         First, a threshold element of Plaintiffs' claims against Sotheby's of aiding and abetting fraud and aiding and abetting a breach of fiduciary duty is proof of the alleged underlying fraud and breach of fiduciary duty by Mr. Bouvier. Mr. Peretti's testimony and documents are relevant, and indeed critical, to proving or disproving whether Mr. Bouvier committed fraud or breached his alleged fiduciary duty to Plaintiffs, given that, according to Plaintiffs, Mr. Peretti has knowledge and information concerning the transactions involving the artworks at issue in the case; the communications between Mr. Bouvier and Plaintiffs; the valuations concerning the artworks at issue that Plaintiffs obtained or attempted to obtain from Mr. Bouvier; the alleged agency or fiduciary relationship between Plaintiffs and Mr. Bouvier; and the alleged fraud and breach of fiduciary duty committed by Mr. Bouvier. See Plaintiffs' Responses to Interrogatories at 4-6 [Exhibit C].

         Second, Plaintiffs must show that Sotheby's had the requisite mental state regarding the alleged fraud and breach of fiduciary in order to succeed on the merits of their aiding and abetting claims. Plaintiffs allege that Sotheby's knew “the fraudulently inflated prices [Mr. Bouvier] charged to Plaintiffs, ” Am. Compl. ¶ 27 [Exhibit A], but Plaintiffs have not alleged how Sotheby's purportedly came to know this information. Plaintiffs have not alleged that they had any direct communications with Sotheby's or that Sotheby's was otherwise involved in the sales transactions between Mr. Bouvier (or his affiliated entities) and Plaintiffs. Further, Sotheby's denies that it had any knowledge of Mr. Bouvier's relationship with Plaintiffs or about what Mr. Bouvier allegedly charged Plaintiffs for any of the artworks at issue. Accordingly, it is critical to obtain Mr. Peretti's testimony and documents regarding whether he or Mr. Bouvier ever told Sotheby's anything about Plaintiffs, including whether he or Mr. Bouvier told Sotheby's anything about (i) the identity of Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs' principal, or Plaintiffs' representatives; (ii) the relationship between Mr. Bouvier and Plaintiffs; or (iii) the prices Plaintiffs paid for any artworks they bought from Mr. Bouvier that Mr. Bouvier previously acquired in a transaction facilitated by Sotheby's.

         Third, a central allegation of Plaintiffs' case is that Sotheby's provided valuations of some of the works to Mr. Bouvier, which according to Plaintiffs were intended by Sotheby's to be passed along by Mr. Bouvier to Plaintiffs to justify the higher prices Mr. Bouvier charged Plaintiffs for those works. See, e.g., Am. Compl. ¶ 4. Sotheby's denies those allegations and asserts that it did not know what Mr. Bouvier planned to do with any work of art he acquired in a transaction brokered by Sotheby's and did not know the price that Mr. Bouvier planned to later charge for any work of art, if he did decide to re-sell it. Further, Sotheby's contends-based on information learned long after the events at issue in the Amended Complaint-that Mr. Bouvier sought the valuations from Sotheby's at Plaintiffs' request because, among other reasons, Plaintiffs wanted to use the valuations to secure loans from one or more financial institutions in Singapore, using one or more of the works as collateral. If, in fact, it was Plaintiffs-and not Mr. Bouvier-who wanted these valuations, then Sotheby's provision of the valuations to Mr. Bouvier cannot have aided and abetted any alleged fraud of Plaintiffs or breach of a fiduciary duty to them. Plaintiffs have acknowledged that Mr. Peretti has knowledge concerning valuations that Plaintiffs obtained or attempted to obtain from Mr. Bouvier. See Plaintiffs' Responses to Interrogatories at 6 [Exhibit C]. Accordingly, Mr. Peretti's knowledge of and information regarding such valuations is of critical importance to both Sotheby's defenses and Plaintiffs' claims.

         While Sotheby's also intends to obtain documents and testimony from Mr. Bouvier and Mr. Rybolovlev, Mr. Peretti is uniquely positioned to provide evidence regarding the communications, representations, and understandings that are central to this dispute.

         7. Identity and Address of the Person to be Examined:

Jean-Marc Peretti XXXXX 1206 Geneva, Switzerland

         8. Questions to be Put to the Person to be Examined or Statement of the Subject Matter About Which They Are to be Examined:

         It is requested that Mr. Peretti be questioned by the Tribunal de première instance de Genève in the presence of the counsel of the parties in the present proceedings with respect to the topics set forth in Appendix A.

         9. Documents and Other Property to be Inspected:

         This Court requests that Mr. Peretti produce the following documents (including electronic documents) which are in his possession, custody, or power:

a. The documents and communications regarding meetings Mr. Peretti attended with Mr. Rybolovlev (Plaintiffs' principal) or any other representatives of Plaintiffs, including but not limited to Mikhail Sazonov, Tetiana Bersheda, and Yuri Bogdanov.
b. The communications, including the emails and their attachments, between Mr. Peretti and (i) Mr. Bouvier (and persons working with or on behalf of Mr. Bouvier), (ii) Mr. Rybolovlev (Plaintiffs' principal), or (iii) other representatives of Plaintiffs regarding Pablo Picasso's L'Homme Assis Au Verre in or around March to April 2011. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 40-52.
c. The communications, including the emails and their attachments, between Mr. Peretti and (i) Mr. Bouvier (and persons working with or on behalf of Mr. Bouvier), (ii) Mr. Rybolovlev (Plaintiffs' principal), or (iii) other representatives of Plaintiffs regarding Aristide Maillol's La Méditerranée in or around April 2011. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 53-60.
d. The communications, including the emails and their attachments, between Mr. Peretti and (i) Mr. Bouvier (and persons working with or on behalf of Mr. Bouvier), (ii) Mr. Rybolovlev (Plaintiffs' principal), or (iii) other representatives of Plaintiffs regarding Auguste Rodin's Le Baiser in or around April 2011. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 61-65.
e. The communications, including the emails and their attachments, between Mr. Peretti and (i) Mr. Bouvier (and persons working with or on behalf of Mr. Bouvier), (ii) Mr. Rybolovlev (Plaintiffs' principal), or (iii) other representatives of Plaintiffs regarding Henri Matisse's Nu au Châle Vert in or around June 2011 and in or around October 2014. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 66-75.
f. The communications, including the emails and their attachments, between Mr. Peretti and (i) Mr. Bouvier (and persons working with or on behalf of Mr. Bouvier), (ii) Mr. Rybolovlev (Plaintiffs' principal), or (iii) other representatives of Plaintiffs regarding Auguste Rodin's L'Éternel Printemps in or around June and July 2011. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 76-84.
g. The communications, including the emails and their attachments, between Mr. Peretti and (i) Mr. Bouvier (and persons working with or on behalf of Mr. Bouvier), (ii) Mr. Rybolovlev (Plaintiffs' principal), or (iii) other representatives of Plaintiffs regarding Alberto Giacometti's Femme de Venise IX in or around September and October 2011. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 85-89.
h. The communications, including the emails and their attachments, between Mr. Peretti and (i) Mr. Bouvier (and persons working with or on behalf of Mr. Bouvier), (ii) Mr. Rybolovlev (Plaintiffs' principal), or (iii) other representatives of Plaintiffs regarding Rene Magritte's Le Domaine d'Arnheim in or around August to December 2011. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 90-100.
i. The communications, including the emails and their attachments, between Mr. Peretti and (i) Mr. Bouvier (and persons working with or on behalf of Mr. Bouvier), (ii) Mr. Rybolovlev (Plaintiffs' principal), or (iii) other representatives of Plaintiffs regarding Amedeo Modigliani's Nu Couché au Coussin Bleu in or around December 2011 and October 2014 to January 2015. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 101-110.
j. The communications, including the emails and their attachments, between Mr. Peretti and (i) Mr. Bouvier (and persons working with or on behalf of Mr. Bouvier), (ii) Mr. Rybolovlev (Plaintiffs' principal), or (iii) other representatives of Plaintiffs regarding Auguste Rodin's Eve in or about January to March 2012 and March to December 2014. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 111-122.
k. The communications, including the emails and their attachments, between Mr. Peretti and (i) Mr. Bouvier (and persons working with or on behalf of Mr. Bouvier), (ii) Mr. Rybolovlev (Plaintiffs' principal), or (iii) other representatives of Plaintiffs regarding Gustav Klimt's Wasserschlangen II in or around August and September 2012, July to September 2013, and October 2014. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 123-134.
l. The communications, including the emails and their attachments, between Mr. Peretti and (i) Mr. Bouvier (and persons working with or on behalf of Mr. Bouvier), (ii) Mr. Rybolovlev (Plaintiffs' principal), or (iii) other representatives of Plaintiffs regarding Amedeo Modigliani's Tête in or around December 2011, June to September 2012, December 2012, and September to December 2014. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 135-157.
m. The communications, including the emails and their attachments, between Mr. Peretti and (i) Mr. Bouvier (and persons working with or on behalf of Mr. Bouvier), (ii) Mr. Rybolovlev (Plaintiffs' principal), or (iii) other representatives of Plaintiffs regarding Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec's Au Lit: Le Baiser in or around October 2012 to February 2013 and December 2014 to March 2015. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 158-165.
n. The communications, including the emails and their attachments, between Mr. Peretti and (i) Mr. Bouvier (and persons working with or on behalf of Mr. Bouvier), (ii) Mr. Rybolovlev (Plaintiffs' principal), or (iii) other representatives of Plaintiffs regarding Leonardo da Vinci's Christ as Salvator Mundi in or around March to May 2013, and March 2014 to January 2015. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 166-188.
o. The communications, including the emails and their attachments, between Mr. Peretti and (i) Mr. Bouvier (and persons working with or on behalf of Mr. Bouvier), (ii) Mr. Rybolovlev (Plaintiffs' principal), or (iii) other representatives of Plaintiffs regarding Paul Gauguin's Otahi (Alone) in or around October 2014 to February 2015. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 189-193.
p. The communications between Mr. Bouvier and Mr. Peretti in or about November to December 2014 in which, according to Plaintiffs' allegations in the U.S Action, Mr. Bouvier texted to Mr. Peretti: “I am in the shit. He does not have cash and wants to place all Picasso and Rodin for public sale.” Am. Compl. ¶ 180.
q. The communications between Mr. Peretti and (i) Mr. Bouvier (and persons working with or on behalf of Mr. Bouvier), (ii) Mr. Rybolovlev (Plaintiffs' principal), or (iii) other representatives of Plaintiffs regarding their efforts to obtain loans from financial institutions, in Singapore and elsewhere, using one or more of the art masterworks as collateral, including the actual or attempted use of any Sotheby's valuations in connection with those efforts.

         10. Any Requirement That the Evidence be Given on Oath or Affirmation and Any Special Form to be Used:

         This Court respectfully requests that Mr. Peretti testify under oath or affirmation in accordance with the applicable procedures of Switzerland. The Court further requests that the testimony be transcribed by a qualified stenographer and that a videographic record be taken of the oral testimony. In the event that the evidence cannot be taken in the manner requested, the Court respectfully requests that the evidence be taken in such manner as provided by local law for the formal taking of evidence.

         11. Special Methods or Procedure to be Followed:

         a. It is respectfully requested that each party's Swiss and United States lawyers be permitted to attend the oral testimony and ask supplementary questions to the witness.

         b. It is further respectfully requested that an interpreter be present to assist the United States lawyers of each party.

         c. Mr. Peretti shall be permitted to be represented by his own counsel at his own expense at the oral testimony should he wish to do so. Mr. Peretti shall not be required to give evidence that is privileged against disclosure under the laws of either the United States or Switzerland.

         d. It is respectfully requested that the requested documents be produced by Mr. Peretti at least forty-five days prior to the date of Mr. Peretti's oral testimony, and that copies be provided to:

Counsel for Defendants: Marcus A. Asner Sara L. Shudofsky Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP 250 West 55th Street New York, New York 10019 Email: Marcus.Asner@arnoldporter.com Email: Sara.Shudofsky@arnoldporter.com Tel: 212 836 7222
Saverio Lembo Aurélie Conrad Hari Bär & Karrer SA 12 quai de la poste 1211 Geneva 11, Switzerland Email: Saverio.Lembo@baerkarrer.ch Email: Aurelie.ConradHari@BaerKarrer.ch Tel: 58 261 57 00
Counsel for Plaintiffs: Daniel Kornstein Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady LLP 600 Fifth Avenue, 10th Floor New York, New York 10020 Email: dkornstein@ecbalaw.com Tel: 212 763 5000
Sandrine Giroud LALIVE Rue de la Mairie 35 P.O. Box 6569 1211 Geneva 6 Switzerland Email: sgiroud@lalive.law

         e. It is requested that the oral testimony of the witness be videotaped and recorded verbatim, and that a professional videographer and a professional stenographer be permitted to attend the oral testimony in order to record the testimony.

         f. This Court requests that the oral testimony be allowed to continue until completed, except that the oral testimony shall not exceed seven hours per day, and shall not exceed a total of fourteen hours.

         12. Request for Notification of the Time and Place of Execution of the Request and Identity and Address of Any Person to be Notified:

         It is requested that the oral testimony be taken as soon as can practicably be arranged. It is respectfully requested that the witness and the counsel listed below be notified of the date, time, and place of the testimony as soon as convenient. If possible, it is requested that notice be furnished to the witness and counsel at least thirty days prior to the testimony.

Counsel for Defendants: Marcus A. Asner Sara L. Shudofsky Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP 250 West 55th Street New York, New York 10019 Email: Marcus.Asner@arnoldporter.com Email: Sara.Shudofsky@arnoldporter.com Tel: 212 836 7222
Saverio Lembo Aurélie Conrad Hari Bär & Karrer SA 12 quai de la Poste 1211 Geneva 11, Switzerland Email: Saverio.Lembo@BaerKarrer.ch Email: Aurelie.ConradHari@BaerKarrer.ch Tel: 58 261 57 00
Counsel for Plaintiffs: Daniel Kornstein Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady LLP 600 Fifth Avenue, 10th Floor New York, New York 10020 Email: dkornstein@ecbalaw.com Tel: 212 763 5000
Sandrine Giroud LALIVE Rue de la Mairie 35 P.O. Box 6569 1211 Geneva 6 Switzerland Email: sgiroud@lalive.law

         13. Request for Attendance or Participation of Judicial Personnel of the Requesting Authority at the Execution of the Letter of Request:

         No attendance of United States judicial personnel is requested.

         14. Specification of Privilege or Duty to Refuse to Give Evidence Under the Law of the United States:

         The witness may refuse to give evidence only insofar as he has a privilege or duty to refuse to give evidence under the laws of the United States or the laws of Switzerland.

         The parties to the U.S. Action have agreed, and this Court has ordered, that any confidential material produced or disclosed by the parties or any third parties will be kept confidential, according to the Local Rules of the Court and/or any protective order entered in the case.

         15. Fees and Costs:

         The fees and costs incurred which are reimbursable under the second paragraph of Article 14 or under Article 26 of the Hague Convention shall be borne by Sotheby's.

         16. Specification of the Date by which the Requesting Authority Requires Receipt of the Response to the Letter of Request:

         The Requesting Authority requests that the oral testimony be taken as soon as practicable after the Requested State receives this Letter of Request, and that the requested documents be produced at least forty-five days before the taking of the oral testimony. Expedient treatment of this Letter of Request will allow the p allies and the witness to arrange a mutually agreeable date for testimony and avoid disruption to the witness's business or personal plans.

         17. Signature and Seal of the Requesting Authority:

         This Court expresses its appreciation for the assistance and courtesy of the courts of Switzerland in this matter, and states that it shall be ready and willing to assist the courts of Switzerland in a similar manner when required.

         Appendix A

         Topics and Questions for Oral Testimony

         I. Background Information

         A. Introduction:

         The below questions seek to obtain general background information.

         B. Questions:

         1. Please state your name for the record.

         2. Where do you currently reside?

         3. For the time period of 2003 to 2015, where did you reside?

         4. Describe your education history.

         5. Describe your professional background and experience.

         6. Where do you currently work?

         7. For the time period of 2003 to 2015, were you employed? If so, by whom or what company? Did you earn income in any other way during that time period? If so, how?

         II. Work with Mr. Bouvier

         A. Introduction:

         Plaintiffs allege that Mr. Peretti is, or was during the relevant time period, Mr. Bouvier's “associate, ” but they do not allege any details regarding the relationship or what role Mr. Peretti played with regard to the art masterworks at issue in the U.S. Action. The following questions are designed to elicit this information. Such evidence is relevant to whether Mr. Peretti worked for, or with, Mr. Bouvier, as Plaintiffs allege, and whether Plaintiffs can prove that Mr. Bouvier committed fraud and breach of fiduciary duty, which are threshold elements of their claims against Sotheby's.

         B. Questions:

         1. When did you first meet Mr. Bouvier?

         2. Are you familiar with any of Mr. Bouvier's companies or affiliated entities? His business at the Geneva Freeport? Natural le Coultre? Blancaflor? MEI Invest? Eagle Overseas? ArteSing? Arrow Fine Art?

         3. Were you ever employed by Mr. Bouvier or any of his companies or affiliated entities?

         a. If so, when? What was your position/role? How were you compensated? Are you still employed by Mr. Bouvier or any of his companies or affiliated entities?

         4. Did you ever work with Mr. Bouvier or any of his companies or affiliated entities in any capacity?

         a. If so, when? What was your position/role? How were you compensated? Are you still working with Mr. Bouvier or any of his companies or affiliated entities?

         5. Did you ever receive any compensation from Mr. Bouvier or any of his companies or affiliated entities?

         a. If so, how much? When? What was it for?

         6. Plaintiffs in the U.S. Action contend that you were Mr. Bouvier's “associate.” Do you agree with this description?

         a. If so, what does it mean? For what time period were you Mr. Bouvier's “associate”?

         b. If not, why do you not agree with this description?

         7. Did you ever receive compensation or payments from Mr. Bouvier or any of his companies or affiliated entities in connection with the art masterworks at issue in the U.S. Action?

         a. If so, when? How much? How was that determined?

         8. Do you have knowledge of Mr. Bouvier's reputation in the art world as of 2003?

         a. If so, what was his reputation? Do you know whether he was well-known? Describe the basis for your knowledge.

         b. Do you have knowledge of Mr. Bouvier's reputation in the art world as of 2011?

         c. If so, what was his reputation? Do you know whether he was well-known? Describe the basis for your knowledge.

         III. General Involvement with Plaintiffs, Sotheby's, and the Artworks at Issue in This Case

         A. Introduction: Plaintiffs contend that Mr. Peretti played a central role in the underlying dispute. Specifically, they assert that Mr. Peretti participated in discussions regarding “works of art for Bouvier to sell to Plaintiffs, ” “the[] quality and importance [of the artworks], ” and “appraisals [regarding some of the artworks].” Am. Compl. ¶ 30. The following questions are intended to obtain information regarding Mr. Peretti's familiarity with Plaintiffs (and their representatives) and his involvement in the art masterworks at issue in the parties' dispute. Such evidence is relevant to Mr. Peretti's and Mr. Bouvier's interactions with Plaintiffs and Sotheby's, Plaintiffs' allegations that Sotheby's aided and abetted Mr. Bouvier's alleged fraud and breach of fiduciary duty, and Sotheby's defense that, if Mr. Bouvier defrauded Plaintiffs or breached any fiduciary duty to them, Sotheby's had no knowledge of any such fraud or breach of fiduciary duty, and has no liability whatsoever to Plaintiffs.

         B. Questions

         1. Are you familiar with Accent Delight International Ltd., one of the Plaintiffs in the U.S. Action? Have you ever personally had any contact with it or its employees/representatives? If so, when? About what?

         2. Are you familiar with Xitrans Finance Ltd., the other Plaintiff in the U.S. Action? Have you ever personally had any contact with it or its employees/representatives? If so, when? About what?

         3. Do you know Dmitry Rybolovlev (Plaintiffs' principal)? Have you ever personally interacted with him? If so, when? About what?

         a. Did you ever attend any meetings with him, or participate in calls or electronic communications with him, regarding artworks he was purchasing from Mr. Bouvier? If so, when? Who was present? What was discussed?

         4. Do you know Tetiana Bersheda (a representative of Plaintiffs)? Have you ever personally interacted with her? If so, when? About what?

         a. Did you ever attend any meetings with her, or participate in calls or electronic communications with her, regarding artworks Plaintiffs were purchasing from Mr. Bouvier? If so, when? Who was present? What was discussed?

         5. Do you know Mikhail Sazonov (a representative of Plaintiffs)? Have you ever personally interacted with him? If so, when? About what?

         a. Did you ever attend any meetings with him, or participate in any calls or electronic communications with him, regarding artworks Plaintiffs were purchasing from Mr. Bouvier? If so, when? Who was present? What was discussed?

         6. Do you know Yuri Bogdanov (a representative of Plaintiffs')? Have you ever personally interacted with him? If so, when? About what?

         a. Did you ever attend any meetings with him, or participate in any calls or electronic communications with him, regarding artworks Plaintiffs were purchasing from Mr. Bouvier? If so, when? Who was present? What was discussed?

         7. Do you have knowledge of the nature of Mr. Bouvier's relationship with Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev?

         a. If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         b. Do you know how and/or when Mr. Bouvier first met Mr. Rybolovlev? Describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         c. Did you participate in any communications between Mr. Bouvier and Mr. Rybolovlev? Describe those communications.

         d. Do you have knowledge about the relationship between Mr. Bouvier and Plaintiffs/Rybolovlev with respect to Plaintiffs'/Mr. Rybolovlev's acquisitions of works of art? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         e. Did Mr. Bouvier ever describe to you the nature of his relationship with Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev in connection with Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev's acquisitions of works of art? If so, describe what he said and when he said it.

         f. Do you know whether Plaintiffs and Mr. Bouvier ever had a written agreement setting out the details of their relationship with respect to Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev's art acquisitions? Describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         g. Do you know if Mr. Bouvier received any payments or other compensation from Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev? If so, describe what you know about those payments or compensation and when you learned it, what they were for, and the basis for your knowledge.

         h. For the time period of 2003 to 2015, did you ever hear Yves Bouvier refer to “the Russian”? If so, do you know who he was referring to? Describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         i. For the time period of 2003 to 2015, did you ever hear Samuel Valette refer to “the Russian”? If so, do you know who he was referring to? Describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         8. Do you know Tania Rappo? How do you know her? Who is she? Have you ever personally interacted with her? If so, describe those interactions and when they took place.

         9. Do you know the nature of any relationship between Ms. Rappo and Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         10. Did Mr. Bouvier ever describe to you the nature of any relationship between Ms. Rappo and Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev? If so, describe what he said and when he said it.

         11. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier ever interacted with Ms. Rappo? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         12. Did Mr. Bouvier ever describe to you any interactions he had with Ms. Rappo? If so, describe what he said and when he said it.

         13. Do you know whether Ms. Rappo was involved in any art acquisitions by Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         14. Did Mr. Bouvier ever describe to you any involvement by Ms. Rappo in any art acquisitions by Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev? If so, describe what he said and when he said it.

         15. Do you know whether Ms. Rappo ever received any compensation, reimbursement, or other payments from Mr. Bouvier in connection with Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev's acquisitions of art? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         16. Did Mr. Bouvier ever describe to you the nature of any compensation, reimbursement, or other payments Ms. Rappo received in connection with Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev's acquisitions of art? If so, describe what he said and when he said it.

         17. In the time period relevant to Sotheby's involvement in the U.S. Action- 2011 to 2015-what role did you play in connection with the art masterworks at issue in the Action?

         a. Did you communicate with Sotheby's employees, as Plaintiffs allege? If so, with whom did you communicate? When? What was discussed?

         b. Did you communicate with any of Plaintiffs' representatives? If so, with whom did you communicate? When? What was discussed?

         18. Do you know anything about Mr. Bouvier's dealings with Sotheby's? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         19. Do you know the nature of Mr. Bouvier's relationship with Sotheby's as of 2011?

         a. If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         b. Do you know how many times, before 2011, Mr. Bouvier acquired art in a transaction facilitated by Sotheby's? Describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         (i) Do you know what, if anything, Mr. Bouvier intended to do with the works he acquired in those transactions at the time of the transactions? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         c. Do you know how many times, before 2011, Mr. Bouvier sold art in a transaction facilitated by Sotheby's? Describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         d. Do you know how many times, after 2011, Mr. Bouvier acquired art in a transaction facilitated by Sotheby's? Describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         e. Do you know how many times, after 2011, Mr. Bouvier sold art in a transaction facilitated by Sotheby's? Describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         f. Do you know if Mr. Bouvier ever paid Sotheby's more for an artwork than Sotheby's had told him it was worth? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         g. Do you know whether Sotheby's has ever stored art at Mr. Bouvier's freeport business in Geneva? How about at his freeport business in Singapore? Describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         h. Do you know whether Sotheby's has used Mr. Bouvier/Natural Le Coultre to transport art? Describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         20. Do you know Samuel Valette?

         a. If so, who is he?

         b. Do you have any kind of relationship with Mr. Valette? If so, describe it.

         c. Have you ever met him? Spoken with him? Emailed with him? Texted with him?

         d. When did you first meet him?

         e. How did you first meet him and how were you introduced?

         f. Do you know how Mr. Valette is compensated by Sotheby's? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         g. Do you know the nature of the relationship between Mr. Valette and Mr. Bouvier? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         (i) Do you know how long they have known each other and how they were introduced? Describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         21. Do you know Bruno Vinciguerra?

         a. If so, who is he?

         b. Do you have any kind of relationship with Mr. Vinciguerra? If so, describe it.

         c. Have you ever met him? Spoken with him? Emailed with him? Texted with him?

         d. When did you first meet him?

         e. How did you first meet him and how were you introduced?

         f. Do you have knowledge of the nature of Mr. Vinciguerra's relationship with Mr. Bouvier? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         (i) Do you know how long have they known each other and how they were introduced? Describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         22. Do you know any other Sotheby's employees?

         a. If so, who do you know?

         b. When did you meet them? How did you meet them? What were your interactions with them about?

         c. Did you communicate with those persons in connection with any art transactions involving Mr. Bouvier? If so, describe those transactions and the communications related to them.

         23. Did you ever discuss the identity of Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs' principal (Mr. Rybolovlev), or any other of Plaintiffs' representatives with anyone at Sotheby's? If so, when? With whom? What was discussed?

         24. Did you ever discuss the relationship between Mr. Bouvier and Plaintiffs with anyone at Sotheby's? If so, when? With whom? What was discussed?

         25. Did you ever discuss with anyone at Sotheby's the prices Plaintiffs or Mr. Rybolovlev paid Mr. Bouvier for any of the artworks Mr. Bouvier acquired in a transaction facilitated by Sotheby's? If so, when? With whom? What was discussed?

         26. Did you ever discuss with anyone at Sotheby's the prices that any other person or entity paid Mr. Bouvier for any of the artworks Mr. Bouvier acquired in a transaction facilitated by Sotheby's, irrespective of the buyer's identity? If so, when? With whom? What was discussed?

         IV. Plaintiffs' Claims Regarding Pablo Picasso's L'Homme Assis Au Verre

         A. Introduction: The following questions are designed to elicit evidence that is relevant to Plaintiffs' claims that Sotheby's aided and abetted Mr. Bouvier's alleged fraud and breach of fiduciary duty with respect to this work of art, and Sotheby's defense that, if Mr. Bouvier defrauded Plaintiffs or breached any fiduciary duty to them, Sotheby's had no knowledge of any such fraud or breach of fiduciary duty, and has no liability whatsoever to Plaintiffs.

         B. Questions:

         1. Did you communicate with Mr. Bouvier about this work? If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         2. Did you communicate with Mr. Valette about this work? If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         3. Did you communicate with any other Sotheby's employees about this work? If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         4. Did you communicate with anyone else about this work? If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         5. A copy of a document has been placed in front of you as Exhibit 1. According to this document, on March 18, 2011, Mr. Valette emailed both you and Mr. Bouvier, attaching a description of this artwork and writing in his cover email: “As agreed, here is the note with the expositions, a commentary on its importance, the photos of Picasso and the photos of the 3 comparable paintings in museums.”

         a. Do you recall this communication? If so, describe what you recall about it.

         b. Do you know why Mr. Valette emailed you and Mr. Bouvier? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         c. According to this document, Mr. Valette wrote “as agreed.” Did Mr. Valette communicate with you about this painting prior to sending you this email? If so, describe any such communications and when they took place.

         d. Do you know whether Mr. Valette communicated with Mr. Bouvier about this painting prior to sending this email? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         e. Do you know who initiated any conversations about this painting you have described? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         f. Do you know why Mr. Valette emailed you this information about this painting? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         6. What did you do with the information and/or materials Mr. Valette provided regarding this work?

         a. Did you give it to anyone else? If so, who?

         b. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier gave it to anyone else? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         c. Did you give this document to Mr. Rybolovlev, Mikhail Sazonov, or anyone working for Plaintiffs or otherwise related to them? If so, describe that communication and when it took place.

         d. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier gave it to Mr. Rybolovlev, Mikhail Sazonov, or anyone working for Plaintiffs or otherwise related to them? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         7. A copy of a document has been placed in front of you as Exhibit 2. According to this document, on March 22, 2011, Mr. Bouvier emailed Mr. Valette to ask when he would have a “definitive price” for this work and suggested that “a price in USD would be the best adapted.” Valette responded: “Message received about the dollars. We were asking ourselves that question.”

         a. Did you receive this communication? If so, describe how and when you received this communication, and who sent it to you.

         b. Did you discuss this communication with Mr. Bouvier? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         c. Did you discuss this communication with any employee of Sotheby's? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         d. Do you know anything about this communication? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         e. Do you know why Mr. Bouvier wrote that “a price in USD would be the best adapted”? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         8. A copy of a document has been placed in front of you as Exhibit 3. According to this document, on March 24, 2011, Mr. Valette emailed Mr. Bouvier a description of the work, writing in his cover email: “Here is a text on the artwork, more focused on its composition. We should have the price tomorrow.” a. Did you receive this communication? If so, describe how and when you received this communication, and who sent it to you.

         b. Did you discuss this communication with Mr. Bouvier? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         c. Did you discuss this communication with any employee of Sotheby's? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         d. Do you know anything about this communication? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         9. A copy of a document has been placed in front of you as Exhibit 4. According to this document, on April 8, 2011, Mr. Valette emailed Mr. Bouvier a description of the artwork, asking Mr. Bouvier: “Please let me know if it works for you.” a. Did you receive this communication? If so, describe how and when you received this communication, and who sent it to you.

         b. Did you discuss this communication with Mr. Bouvier? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         c. Did you discuss this communication with any employee of Sotheby's? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         d. Do you know anything about this communication? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         e. Do you know why Mr. Valette asked Mr. Bouvier if the description “works for you”? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         10. A copy of a document has been placed in front of you as Exhibit 5. According to this document, about an hour after the communication you just reviewed (Exhibit 4), Mr. Valette emailed Mr. Bouvier the description as a PDF.

         a. Did you receive this communication? If so, describe how and when you received this communication, and who sent it to you.

         b. Did you discuss this communication with Mr. Bouvier? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         c. Did you discuss this communication with any employee of Sotheby's? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         d. Do you know anything about this communication? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         e. Do you know why Mr. Valette sent this description to Mr. Bouvier? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         (i) Do you know why Mr. Valette sent the description first in a Word file, and then in a PDF? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         f. Do you know what Mr. Bouvier did with this description? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         (i) Do you know if Mr. Bouvier sent this description to Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         11. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier acquired this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         12. Do you know what Mr. Bouvier paid for this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         13. Do you know whether Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev acquired this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         14. Do you know what Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev paid for this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         15. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier received any other compensation, reimbursement, or other payment from Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev in connection with this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         16. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier and Plaintiffs had any kind of agreement with respect to this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         17. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier made any representations to Plaintiffs' representatives, including Mr. Rybolovlev, about the price of this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         18. Did you communicate with any of the following people regarding this artwork:

a. Dmitry Rybolovlev?
b. Mikhail Sazonov?
c. Tetiana Bersheda?
d. Yuri Bogdanov?
e. Anyone else affiliated with, related to, or working with/for Mr. Rybolovlev?
f. If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         19. Did you communicate with Sotheby's about what Mr. Bouvier intended to do, or did, with the work after the transaction with Sotheby's? If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         a. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier communicated with Sotheby's about what Mr. Bouvier intended to do, or did, with the work after the transaction with Sotheby's? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         20. Did you discuss with Sotheby's the identity of any person or entity other than Mr. Bouvier who was acquiring or would be acquiring this work? If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         a. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier discussed with Sotheby's the identity of any person or entity other than Mr. Bouvier who was acquiring or would be acquiring this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         21. Did you discuss with Sotheby's the price paid by any person or entity other than Mr. Bouvier to acquire this work? If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         a. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier discussed with Sotheby's the price paid by any person or entity other than Mr. Bouvier to acquire this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         22. Do you know whether Ms. Rappo was involved in Plaintiffs' acquisition of this artwork? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         23. Do you know whether Ms. Rappo received any compensation, reimbursement, or other payment in connection with the acquisition of this artwork? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         V. Plaintiffs' Claims Regarding Aristide Maillol's La Méditerranée

         A. Introduction:

         The following questions are designed to elicit evidence that is relevant to Plaintiffs' claims that Sotheby's aided and abetted Mr. Bouvier's alleged fraud and breach of fiduciary duty with respect to this work of art, and Sotheby's defense that, if Mr. Bouvier defrauded Plaintiffs or breached any fiduciary duty to them, Sotheby's had no knowledge of any such fraud or breach of fiduciary duty, and has no liability whatsoever to Plaintiffs.

         B. Questions:

         1. Did you communicate with Mr. Bouvier about this work? If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         2. Did you communicate with Mr. Valette about this work? If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         3. Did you communicate with any other Sotheby's employees about this work? If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         4. Did you communicate with anyone else about this work? If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         5. A copy of a document has been placed in front of you as Exhibit 6. According to this document, on April 9, 2011, Mr. Valette emailed Mr. Bouvier with a description of Maillol's La Méditerranée. Valette's email begins: “Here is the information on the Maillol, La Méditerranée.”

         a. Did you receive this communication? If so, describe how and when you received this communication, and who sent it to you.

         b. Did you discuss this communication with Mr. Bouvier? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         c. Did you discuss this communication with any employee of Sotheby's? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         d. Do you know anything about this communication? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         6. A copy of a document has been placed in front of you as Exhibit 7. According to this document, Mr. Valette emailed Mr. Bouvier an attachment of a description of this work, without any cover email. The attachment appears to be a Word file.

         a. Did you receive this communication or the artwork description attached to it? If so, describe how and when you received this communication or the artwork description, and who sent it to you.

         b. Did you discuss this communication or the artwork description attached to it with Mr. Bouvier? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         c. Did you discuss this communication or the artwork description attached to it with any employee of Sotheby's? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         d. Do you know anything about this communication or the artwork description attached to it? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         7. A copy of a document has been placed in front of you as Exhibit 8. According to this document, on April 14, 2011, Mr. Valette emailed Mr. Bouvier a PDF description for this artwork. Mr. Valette wrote: “Does the client want to send his transporters to pick them up or does he prefer that they be delivered to the freeport? Thanks for letting me know what the client prefers.” This email also refers to Rodin's Le Baiser.

         a. Did you receive this communication or the artwork description attached to it? If so, describe how and when you received this communication or the artwork description, and who sent it to you.

         b. Did you discuss this communication or the artwork description attached to it with Mr. Bouvier? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         c. Did you discuss this communication or the artwork description attached to it with any employee of Sotheby's? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         d. Do you know anything about this communication or the artwork description attached to it? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         e. At the time of this email, did you know who “the client” was that Mr. Valette referred to? Did you learn anything about that afterwards? Describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         f. Do you know why Mr. Valette sent the description first in a Word file, and then as a PDF? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         8. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier acquired this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         9. Do you know what Mr. Bouvier paid for this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         10. Do you know whether Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev acquired this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         11. Do you know what Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev paid for this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         12. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier received any other compensation, reimbursement, or other payment from Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev in connection with this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         13. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier and Plaintiffs had any kind of agreement with respect to this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         14. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier made any representations to Plaintiffs' representatives, including Mr. Rybolovlev, about the price of this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         15. Did you communicate with any of the following people regarding this artwork:

a. Dmitry Rybolovlev?
b. Mikhail Sazonov?
c. Tetiana Bersheda?
d. Yuri Bogdanov?
e. Anyone else affiliated with, related to, or working with/for Mr. Rybolovlev?
f. If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         16. Did you communicate with Sotheby's about what Mr. Bouvier intended to do, or did, with the work after the transaction with Sotheby's? If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         a. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier communicated with Sotheby's about what Mr. Bouvier intended to do, or did, with the work after the transaction with Sotheby's? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         17. Did you discuss with Sotheby's the identity of any person or entity other than Mr. Bouvier who was acquiring or would be acquiring this work? If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         a. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier discussed with Sotheby's the identity of any person or entity other than Mr. Bouvier who was acquiring or would be acquiring this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         18. Did you discuss with Sotheby's the price paid by any person or entity other than Mr. Bouvier to acquire this work? If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         a. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier discussed with Sotheby's the price paid by any person or entity other than Mr. Bouvier to acquire this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         19. Do you know whether Ms. Rappo was involved in Plaintiffs' acquisition of this artwork? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         20. Do you know whether Ms. Rappo received any compensation, reimbursement, or other payment in connection with the acquisition of this artwork? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         VI. Plaintiffs' Claims Regarding Auguste Rodin's Le Baiser

         A. Introduction:

         The following questions are designed to elicit evidence that is relevant to Plaintiffs' claims that Sotheby's aided and abetted Mr. Bouvier's alleged fraud and breach of fiduciary duty with respect to this work of art, and Sotheby's defense that, if Mr. Bouvier defrauded Plaintiffs or breached any fiduciary duty to them, Sotheby's had no knowledge of any such fraud or breach of fiduciary duty, and has no liability whatsoever to Plaintiffs.

         B. Questions:

         1. Did you communicate with Mr. Bouvier about this work? If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         2. Did you communicate with Mr. Valette about this work? If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         3. Did you communicate with any other Sotheby's employees about this work? If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         4. Did you communicate with anyone else about this work? If so, describe those communications and when they took place.

         5. A copy of a document has been placed in front of you as Exhibit 9. According to this document, on April 4, 2011, Mr. Valette emailed you a description of this artwork.

         a. Do you recall this communication? If so, describe what you recall about it.

         b. Do you know why Mr. Valette emailed you this information? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         (i) Do you know why he emailed you instead of Mr. Bouvier? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         c. Had you discussed this artwork with Mr. Valette before you received this email? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         (i) Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier discussed this artwork with Mr. Valette before this email? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         6. A copy of a document has been placed in front of you as Exhibit 10. According to this document, on April 9, 2011, Mr. Bouvier emailed Mr. Valette with the subject line “Urgent” and wrote: “I am already seeing my friend tomorrow Sunday.” Mr. Bouvier requested more information about the work “so that I have the maximum arguments.” According to this document, Mr. Valette subsequently emailed information about the artwork.

         a. Did you receive this communication? If so, describe how and when you received this communication, and who sent it to you.

         b. Did you discuss this communication with Mr. Bouvier? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         c. Did you discuss this communication with any employee of Sotheby's? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         d. Do you know anything about this communication? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         e. At the time of this email, did you know who the “friend” was that Mr. Bouvier referred to? Did you learn anything about that afterwards? Describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         f. At the time of this email, did you know what Mr. Bouvier meant by having “the maximum arguments”? Did you learn anything about that afterwards? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         7. According to this document, Mr. Valette subsequently emailed information about the artwork.

         a. Did you receive this communication? If so, describe how and when you received this communication, and who sent it to you.

         b. Did you discuss this communication with Mr. Bouvier? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         c. Did you discuss this communication with any employee of Sotheby's? If so, describe those discussions and when they took place.

         d. Do you know anything about this communication? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         e. Do you know what Mr. Bouvier did with this information? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         (i) Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier sent this information to Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         8. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier acquired this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         9. Do you know what Mr. Bouvier paid for this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         10. Do you know whether Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev acquired this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         11. Do you know what Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev paid for this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         12. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier received any other compensation, reimbursement, or other payment from Plaintiffs/Mr. Rybolovlev in connection with this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         13. Do you know whether Mr. Bouvier and Plaintiffs had any kind of agreement with respect to this work? If so, describe what you know, when you learned it, and the basis for your knowledge.

         14. Did you communicate with any of the following people regarding this artwork:

a. Dmitry Rybolovlev?
b. Mikhail ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.