One of the most significant scandals to hit Hollywood memorabilia collecting in the past decade was a series of discoveries in the poster community relating to purported fraudulent movie posters and one sheets. A new update was published yesterday on the MoPo Mailing List at FilmFan.com by Dianne Jeffrey, President and CEO of Studio Conservation Inc. Ms. Jeffrey was the professional who did some of the restoration work (in good faith) on the Dracula poster consigned to a Profiles in History auction in which it was featured on the cover of their “Hollywood Auction 37” sale event in 2009. Ms. Jeffrey has stated on MoPo that she received notice of a default judgment against her from Thomas Rega “in the amount of $263,312.50, plus attorney fees of $18,134.80”; she is a resident of California and the lawsuit was filed against her in New Jersey and she did not represent herself and/or her business in court. Interestingly, Profiles in History was previously awarded a default judgment against Thomas Rega in their own lawsuit filed against him in California.
The most recent complaint was purportedly brought against Diana Jeffrey by Thomas Rega, who consigned the Dracula poster to Profiles in History. He had employed her to do some restoration work on the poster, then sent it to Profiles in History on consignment sale, who listed it for public auction as a vintage 1931 “incredibly rare 27 in. x 41 in. one-sheet style-B” worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. Profiles in History, in turn, employed John Davis at Poster Mountain to authenticate the poster prior to offering it for public auction.
Diane Jeffrey was the individual who contacted Profiles in History with concerns about the authenticity of the piece – after seeing it as what appeared to be the same or a similar piece to the poster she had recently done restoration work on – which prompted Profiles in History to have poster expert John Davis at Poster Mountain reexamine the piece, who then determined it to be a highly sophisticated fake/forgery.
The poster was pulled from the auction, and substantial analysis was published online detailing the purported forgery.
Profiles in History filed a complaint against consignor Thomas Rega in California Superior Court in 2010 for fraudulent misrepresentation, fraudulent concealment, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of written contract. They were ultimately awarded a default judgment against Mr. Rega in the amount of $73,562.50 in August 2010 for their lost buyer’s premium, seller’s premium, attorney’s fees, and other costs. This ruling was appealed by Mr. Rega, but the appeal was dismissed in August 2011.
More than three years after this all began, per a public statement from Dianne Jeffrey, she claims that Thomas Rega now has a judgment against her that is several times the judgment that Profiles in History has against him.
Note that I do not have access to ANY of the court documents from the purported Thomas Rega lawsuit against Dianne Jeffrey, and thus have not verified any of her claims. Ms. Jeffrey has stated that the case is with the Superior Court of New Jersey, Bergen County (Docket No. BER-L-383-10). As such, I cannot provide ANY verified information about this second case other than what Ms. Jeffrey has published on MoPo, which is her own personal and subjective opinions and statements.
As reported in 2010, a series of civil lawsuits resulted from the various poster scandals that rocked the collecting community, as did an FBI investigation; additionally, in 2012 there was one prison sentence with an order to also pay over $1.3 million in restitution to victims.
Getting back to the Dracula poster scandal – arguably the highest profile one, since it was literally on the cover of the Profiles in History auction catalog for that sale – Dianne Jeffrey was one of the individuals that was openly questioning the authenticity of the (at the time professionally verified genuine) poster.
As reported on September 30, 2009, as the scandal was breaking and the poster was pulled from the auction, a full week earlier Ms. Jeffrey was publishing questions about the piece on MoPo. She explained that she had performed a “linenbacking” of what appeared to be the same Dracula poster a few months earlier, and wanted to determine if the poster offered for sale at auction was indeed the same piece. She stated that she had contacted John Davis at Poster Mountain and published excerpts from their e-mail exchange, in which Mr. Davis reiterated that the piece was “irrefutable authentic”. An excerpt from Diane Jeffrey’s message that I republished at the time:
My main concern, and still is, the fact that I questioned the piece I had in here, at the time, due to several items. The piece did not have the “feel”,: of normal poster paper, and it also had some type of remnant backing on the back, sort of like a layer of cardboard. Also, both bottom corners had been meticulously ripped out, only in the section where the text would have been in the borders causing me to think it might be a re-issue or something. I questioned my client on this at the time. He offered little insight to all of this, and stated, its just going to be framed. I did the restoration, and when it came time for the text issue, he dictated what he wanted us to write in that area, which we did, knowing that it probably was not correct.
When the news broke about the Universal fakes, I immediately thought about that poster, especially since my client was new, I knew nothing about him and he lived in New Jersey.
I was surprised to see the exact same title in Profiles Auction. As stated above, I was alarmed when I had a Dracula poster in my shop, for the above reasons, and since hearing about the terrible fake scam.
My call to you was to simply find out if it might be the same poster, and if it was, to offer any information I had.
Profiles in History ultimately pulled the Dracula poster from their auction, and, as noted, prevailed in their lawsuit against the consignor, Thomas Rega, though the victory was more a result of a tardy defense mounted by Mr. Rega rather than as a result of arguing the merits of the case.
Again, while I have not reviewed ANY of the documents in the purported case of Thomas Rega against Dianne Jeffrey and/or her business, Studio Conservation, Inc., she has published her own personal and subjective comments on the matter on MoPo, some of which I will copy below (with their respective links):
MoPo | Dracula Update | Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:09:25 -0700
Hi All –
Just wanted to report that last week I received a Summons for Civil Action.
The Plaintiff is the consigner of the poster (my client). I have yet to figure out how to get the link for the lawsuit, but if Ed/Sue of LAMP want to add it to their Lawsuit gallery, it is Superior Court of New Jersey, Bergen County Docket No. BER-L-383-10.
I suppose I always knew that there was a possibility that someone would sue me for my participation in trying to prevent yet another fraud/fake case, like the Universal tragedy.
Diane
Studio C
MoPo | As The Dracula Lawsuit Turns | Sun, 25 Mar 2012 18:49:43 -0700
Hi All – Looks like this will come to an end soon. For those interested, I have included below, my feeble attempts to make a wrong, right, 2 letters to the court. I certianly do not expect a good outcome, but it will be interesting to see the amount of Judgment.
Diane
Studio C____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Hon. Brian R. Martinotti, J.S.C.
Superior Court of New Jersey
Bergen County Justice Center
10 Main Street, Room 115
Hackensack, New Jersey 07601March 26, 2012
Re: Thomas Rega v. Sal Oliveri, Film Shows, Inc and Studio Conservation, Inc.
Docket No.: BER-L-383-10ORDER GRANTING FINAL JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT PROOF HEARING
Dear Hon. Brian R. Martinotti, J.S.C.:
I am the defendant, Diane Jeffrey, in the above case. I have been informed that on April 13, 2012 or later, the plaintiff in this case will seek an order from you granting Final Judgment by Default. I have enclosed a letter regarding this case, previously sent to the court, for your review.
It is my understanding that since I was not in a financial position to retain counsel, in order to defend myself, a motion for a Final Judgment will be granted, against me. I also understand that the plaintiff will be required to show proof of damages.
As the enclosed letter indicates, I did not interfere with a contract between Plaintiff and Profiles In History, as said contract was null and void when it was discovered that the consignment material was fake. Plaintiff can not prove damages in this case. Therefore, I am respectively requesting that your Judgment be in the amount, no greater than $1.00.
I appreciate it very much your taking into account , the facts pertaining to this case.
Very truly yours,
Diane Jeffrey
CC: Motion Clerk, Civil Division
Law Offices of Charles Shaw
Profiles In History____________________________________________________________________________________________________
April 14, 2011
Honorable Charles E. Powers, Jr., J.S.C.
Superior Court of New Jersey
Bergen County Justice Center
10 Main Street, Chambers 335
Hackensack, New Jersey 07601Re: Docket No.: BER-L-383-10
Thomas Rega v. Sal Oliveri, Film Shows, Inc. and Studio Conservation, Inc.Dear Judge Powers:
I am writing to you with regard to the above case, which is one of the cases over which you are presiding. My name is Diane Jeffrey, and I am the owner of Studio Conservation Inc. I am writing to you due to the fact that I am not represented by an attorney because I am unable to afford the fees required for representation. Therefore, I would like to take this opportunity to advise you of some very important facts regarding this case:
I have no knowledge of or any dealings with Sal Oliveri, Film Shows, Inc.
Basically, I do not know nor have I ever met this person.
Studio Conservation Inc. was a service business that restored art and collectible items, including old movie posters.
My first contact with Mr. Rega took place in early 2009 when he hired me to restore a one-sheet Dracula poster. I restored the poster to Mr. Rega’s specifications and returned it to him.
Later in the year, a poster with the same title and graphics appeared on the cover of a catalogue published by the auction house Profiles In History. The poster was featured for sale in their next auction with an estimated price of $200,000 to $300,000. It was considered to be a rare item.
Because it was considered to be a rare item and because over 100 other “high end” Universal Studio horror movie posters had recently been proven to be fake, this particular Dracula poster was being scrutinized by many in the movie poster hobby community even though it had a Certificate of Authenticity issued by Poster Mountain. (Poster Mountain is a vintage poster and fine art conservation and restoration company.) At that time I did not know if this was the same poster that I had restored for Mr. Rega; however, there were similarities in the restoration performed on the poster in the auction and the one that I had done for Mr. Rega. Thus, I contacted Poster Mountain first to offer my knowledge of the poster, if, in fact, it was the same poster. It was only after Poster Mountain refused my information that I indicated on a public forum that I had worked on a poster with the same title and graphics a few months before the catalogue was published. I described the specific restoration on the Dracula poster sent to me by Mr. Rega. As a result of the comments I had made on a public forum, both Poster Mountain and many other poster collectors began to question the authenticity of this poster, and Poster Mountain determined that the poster was not an original, but instead was a reproduction created by S2 Art Co.
Based on the complaint filed against me, it appears to me that I am being charged with two counts:
1. Tortious Interference with Contractual Relations and Prospective Economic Benefit
It appears to me that Mr. Rega is claiming that I interfered in the consignment contract between him and Profiles In History. It is my belief that when it was discovered that the poster was not an original, the consignment contract should have become null and void as Mr. Rega had not supplied an original Dracula poster for auction. I believe I should not be faulted because Mr. Rega did not receive an economic benefit from a fake poster. As stated above, I became aware that the poster I had worked on and the poster offered for auction were the same only after being contacted by Profiles In History. I did not contact them.
Furthermore, I never knew if Mr. Rega was aware that the poster he had sent me was a fake, and I never indicated that to Profiles In History.
2. False Light/Trade Libel
I am disputing this charge because the only information I supplied to Profiles In History was the name of the client that had sent me the Dracula poster. I never indicated to anyone that I believed Mr. Rega knew the poster was a fake because when I was working on it, I did not know for sure that it was. Also, I did not reveal Mr. Rega’s name in any of my correspondence on the public forums or with anyone else. If Profiles In History or any other company has refused to do business with Mr. Rega, it might be because the entire group of posters he gave to Profiles In History included not only the fake Dracula poster but several other fake items which Profiles In History refused to consign. This is all verified in the Profiles In History suit against Mr. Rega.
In view of all the facts regarding this case, I feel that all I did was to start a ball rolling that resulted in preventing an innocent individual from spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on a fake poster. I strongly contend that I am not, in any way, responsible for Mr. Rega’s lack of economic gain from the Dracula poster or anything else. In light of this explanation of my involvement, I find it hard to believe that our court system could find any merit to the frivolous claims against me.
Once again as I stated above, I am in no financial position to hire an attorney, yet it is my understanding that in the state of New Jersey, a corporation must be defended by an attorney in a civil case. It is my hope that your Honor can suggest a method that will allow me defend myself so as not to suffer a Default Judgment simply because I do not have the funds for an attorney.
I can supply copies of all paperwork, emails, correspondence, photos to support everything that I have stated to you, and I am willing to come to New Jersey to defend myself in a trial before you and or a jury of my peers. However, it is my sincere hope that after you have read this letter, you will concur that I did nothing wrong and that I acted in a manner that was morally correct.
Please advise me as to what my next step should be. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely yours,
Diane Jeffrey
Cc: Law Office Of Charles Shaw & Associates.
Sent via FAX, US Mail
MoPo | As The Dracula Lawsuit Turns-Final Update | Tue, 22 Jan 2013 18:18:40 -0800
To All –
Well, after numerous postponements, numerous letters to the Judge and over 3 years in time, today I received a Judgment against me in the amount of: $263,312.50, plus attorney fees of $18,134.80. That is our justice system, and in my opinion, not its finest moment!.
Thank you to all that tried to help me, and to all the encouraging private emails I received about this.
Diane
Studio CPS – If you see an old lady that appears to need help crossing the street, or if you see something in this world that appears to be morally not right, DO NOT do anything, I repeat, DO NOT do anything!!!!!!! Lesson for today.
As noted, I do not have access to the court documents from the New Jersey lawsuit, but California Superior Court uploads documents from their own court cases online, with a fee-based service.
California Superior Case Number BC431481, PROFILES IN HISTORY VS THOMAS REGA, includes declarations from many principals involved in the Dracula poster scandal – Brian Chanes with Plaintiff Profiles in History (the auction house that took the poster to sell in their auction), Defendant Thomas Rega (consignor of the poster), Diane Jeffrey of Studio Conservation, Inc. (who did restoration work on the poster, cautioned Profiles about its authenticity, and was subsequently sued by Thomas Rega in the following suit), and John Davis of Poster Mountain (who purportedly mis-authenticated the poster, and then debunked it after Dianne Jeffrey and others raised concerns about its authenticity).
Below are some excerpts from the court documents featuring those declarations. Publishing each of these public documents would appear to be in the public interest to assist in understanding the controversy in the attempted public sale of this poster, as well as an appropriate manner in which to highlight the perspective and arguments made by each of the principal parties involved in this case in context.
Brian Chanes, Profiles in History (PLAINTIFF) [PDF Download]:
Thomas Rega (DEFENDANT) [PDF Download]:
Diane Jeffrey, Studio Conservatory, Inc. (Restoration, future Defendant in subsequent lawsuit) [PDF Download]:
John Davis, Poster Mountain (Authentication) [PDF Download]:
Past related articles published by the Original Prop Blog can be found via the link below (Market Watch | Posters, One Sheets, Lobby Cards):
Jason DeBord