## Facts

- Christie’s, an auction house, extended a series of loans to Jerome and Susan Davis, secured by pledged artwork, decorative art, and antique furniture.
- In September 1997, the Davises borrowed $4.5 million and executed a secured promissory note and security agreement identifying collateral by schedules.
- The parties amended the loan documents five times as Christie’s made additional advances; by the fifth amendment (February 2001), the debt totaled $15,495,100 and the collateral list expanded.
- The collateral consisted of hundreds of items, including seventeenth–nineteenth-century European and Chinese paintings, decorative objects, and antique furniture; the parties largely did not dispute the collateral lists.
- The Davises defaulted on the indebtedness.
- Christie’s sought recovery of the collateral through New York replevin procedures (CPLR Article 71), including a declaration of superior possessory rights and an order requiring delivery before final judgment.
- The Davises conceded the debt, the default, and that the paintings were “unique,” but argued Christie’s had not shown uniqueness (and thus inadequacy of money damages) for the decorative art and antique furniture.

## Issues

1. Whether Christie’s established, as a matter of law, a superior right to immediate possession of the pledged collateral after the Davises’ default, warranting replevin relief under CPLR Article 71.
2. Whether the collateral—particularly the decorative art and antique furniture—qualified as “unique” chattels such that a money judgment would be inadequate, justifying pre-judgment delivery under CPLR § 7109(b).

## Decision

- The court granted Christie’s motion for summary judgment.
- The court held Christie’s had a superior right to immediate possession of the collateral based on the loan and security documents and the undisputed default.
- The court held the pledged collateral was “unique” for purposes of CPLR § 7109(b) and ordered the Davises to deliver the collateral to Christie’s before final judgment.

## Legal Principles

- In a replevin action under CPLR Article 71, the plaintiff must show a superior right to immediate possession of the chattel.
- A secured creditor may establish a superior possessory right through valid security documents and proof of the debtor’s default, where material facts regarding the security interest and default are undisputed.
- Pre-judgment delivery under CPLR § 7109(b) is available when the chattel is “unique” or has peculiar value such that monetary relief is inadequate.
- “Uniqueness” under CPLR § 7109(b) turns on practical non-fungibility and lack of ready market substitutes, not on proof that each item is singular in existence.
- Where parties specifically bargain for identified works as collateral, that contractual allocation supports requiring return of the pledged items rather than limiting the secured party to a money award.

## Conclusion

The court awarded Christie’s summary judgment on its replevin claims, finding an undisputed superior right to immediate possession after default and concluding that the pledged artworks, antiques, and decorative objects were sufficiently non-fungible to justify an order compelling pre-judgment delivery under CPLR § 7109(b).


Christie’s Inc. v. Davis, 247 F. Supp. 2d 414 (S.D.N.Y. 2002)