Posted on 07/30/2009 7:51:03 PM PDT by bruinbirdman
The celebrity portrait photographer Annie Leibovitz is being sued by an art finance company which lent her $24 million against the value of her entire collection and her two homes.
In a lawsuit filed on Wednesday in the New York State Supreme Court, Art Capital Group claimed Leibovitz had violated the terms of their agreement, engaging in "boldly deceptive conduct" to avoid paying hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The company asked a judge to force Leibovitz to co-operate with the person assigned to selling her copyrights and organising the sale of her properties in Manhattan and upstate New York, so she can pay back the loan.
Leibovitz, 59, whose photographic subjects have included the Queen and Michelle Obama, approached Art Capital in June last year about her "dire financial condition" arising from mortgages, tax and unpaid bills, the lawsuit said. She initially borrowed $22 million but later increased it to $24 million.
"In connection with the negotiation of this $22 million credit facility, Leibovitz discussed and acknowledged that Leibovitz's fine art, intellectual property and real estate assets, all collateral for the loan, would likely need to be sold ... as part of the process of Leibovitz's financial restructuring," the lawsuit said.
Art Capital claims Leibovitz has refused to allow estate agents into her homes so they can value them nor will she meet with people interested in buying her photographic collection.
Rachel Williams, the photographer's lawyer, declined to comment on the lawsuit.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Am I crazy, or does she REALLY look a lot like Ralph Nader in drag ???
Let me get this straight...The Company loaned her the money based on her word? She wouldn’t let them in her home so they just took her word for it? And now they’re mad at HER? This is absurd.
However, lefties are saying Annie is a victim of the "gay tax", by which she was screwed when her ex-lover Susan Sontag died and left her properties in her will. The problem is, even with gay marrage, they had broken up and were living with others, so it doesn't even apply.
I think it's Howard Stern when he had his hair dyed yellow.
She looks like my old hippie-uncle.
Seriously!!
I still respect a mediocre painter or sketch artist over a "great" photographer. Annie is one of the luckiest broads in the world to have branded herself as the preferred person to point cameras at celebrities and push a button. The last two pictures you posted looked like simple point-and-shoot photos that anybody could have done. The picture of the Queen is quite nice though. Putting flamesuit on just in case.
I go with Nader.
Maybe posthumously they are worth some more bucks?
yitbos
40 years as a keen amateur photographer here - not that it means that much but -
Its a rather different skill than drawing, etc., but it is surprisingly difficult to get a “wow” picture like some of these people do on a regular basis.
Even in the case of a revealing portrait that LOOKS like it could have been taken by Joe Blow with a point&shoot - well, Joe Blows rarely take such pictures even when they try. It just ain’t that easy.
I agree with you. Thing is with Leibovitz is that she became the "in thing" in terms of photography. She has a great eye for that, and it drew some big celebs. She got some great shots. But............20+Million worth? I don't get that.........
That is hilarious!!!!
It is that easy. She’s not one in a million, she’s more like one in a hundred photographers. Her great talent was access not photography.
Marc Hauser is as good, but you likely never heard of him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.