Marianne Thorsen, Plaintiff, v. George Cole and George Cole Auction and Realty, Defendants. (2026)

Plaintiff Marianne Thorsen is suing defendants George Cole and George Cole Auction and Realty for $3,000.00 claiming that she asked them to auction a variety of items for her. She claims that defendants did nothing with the items for nearly three years. She then claims that she asked for the items back and defendants did not return the items. She then claims that when the items were finally sold, they did not earn what they were truly worth. Plaintiff offered into evidence paper copies of various documents and prints of email communications with defendants in support of her contentions.

Defendants claim that they had a flood at their facility and therefore lost track of paperwork and location of items, which is why it took so long to sell the items. Defendants offered no documentary proof of such a flood. Defendants claim that they sent the items to another auctioneer for sale but again offered no documentary evidence of such a transfer.

Defendants eventually sold plaintiff's metal lanterns, a carved stone Buddha and a wrought iron queen bed for a total of $3,160.66. Plaintiff produced no evidence that these items were sold for under market value.

However, defendant also sold a set of 122 pieces of silver plate flatware for only $50.00. Plaintiff produced evidence of an independent valuation of similar flatware at $14.50 per piece. Defendant offered no evidence to challenge this evaluation. Therefore, the 122-piece set, valued at $14.50 for each piece, should have produced $1,769.00 in sales. Deducting $50.00 for which the items were actually sold, defendants would owe plaintiff $1,719.00.

The Court has before it in evidence the Consignment Contract on the flatware. The contract reads, in part, as follows "I (meaning the consignor, Ms. Thorsen) understand that unless I specify a reserve sale price, there is no guarantee of sale price." There is no evidence that such a reserve price was set.

Although it would appear that the flatware was sold for far below market value, the language of the contract signed by both parties must rule and the Court is constrained to dismiss the claim.

SO ORDERED.

Red Hook, New York

June 1, 2026

JONAH TRIEBWASSER

Village Justice

Jonah Triebwasser, J.