Stolen $7M car could be coming home to Milwaukee
Who should ultimately own a rare French sports car, stolen as parts from Milwaukee in 2001 and now worth more than $7 million, is a question headed back to a Milwaukee court, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
In a 6-0 opinion, the court affirmed a Court of Appeals decision that the
theft victim’s heir can sue to reclaim the now fully restored car from the Illinois dental tycoon who paid $7.6 million for it in 2015.
Justice Rebecca Dallet, who had dismissed that lawsuit before she was on the high court, did not participate in the case.
“I’m glad common sense prevailed here,” said Matthew V. Fisher, who represents the original owner’s cousin, who inherited the car.
Few state Supreme Court opinions focus on something as interesting as the history of car at the center of Richard Mueller v. TL90108 LLC, first reported by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and now the subject of an upcoming film.
The disassembled 1938 Talbot Lago T150 C teardrop coupe had been in Roy Lieske’s old plastics factory on Marshall Street since 1967. In 2001, sophisticated thieves broke in and stole all the parts and the paperwork.
It was never recovered. Lieske died in 2005, at 93, and his cousin, Richard “Skip” Mueller, inherited Lieske’s estate, including his rights to the Talbot Lago.
Years later, Joseph L. Ford III, an architect, lawyer and former classic car seller from Florida heard about the phantom Milwaukee Talbot while pursuing the recovery of a stolen rare Ferrari in Europe. He persuaded Mueller to sell him a share and began to help track down the missing car.
In 2016, an entity called TL90109 LLC — referring to the car’s serial number — tried to register the long-missing car in Illinois. Because it was still on a national database of stolen cars, officials denied registration and alerted Milwaukee police, who contacted Mueller.
Ford and Mueller explained the backstory to the new owner, dental company tycoon and serious car collector Rick Workman, who had purchased it through an East Coast broker for $7.6 million.
Workman declined to give the car back to Mueller and Ford, so they sued. The case turned on timing; Workman’s lawyers said the time limit for that kind of case, known as a replevin action, expired six years after the car was stolen.
Dallet granted Workman’s motion to dismiss the case.
But Ford convinced the Court of Appeals that a new six-year clock began when Workman denied the demand to return the car, making it a “wrongful detention,” and the replevin lawsuit should go forward.
Workman appealed to the Supreme Court.
Writing for the court, Justice Brian Hagedorn cited a case about logs from 1873. A landowner could demand the return of logs unlawfully cut from his land from the person who innocently bought them from the logger.
The point, Hagedorn wrote, is that “a wrongful detention claim is separate from a conversion claim,” and Mueller and Ford had such a claim even without first demanding a return of the car.
Workman had argued that if an original owner got a new six years to sue every time the stolen property changed hands, there might never be certainty and finality about ownership — which is the point of the statute meant to limit such actions.
Under Workman’s view, Ford argued, thieves could gain clear title to the property they steal if they just stashed it away for six years, and Wisconsin art dealers, museums and collectors of all kinds of valuable things would become targets of professional theft rings.
Larry Heftman, one of Workman’s Chicago attorneys, issued a statement Tuesday about the decision.
“Dr. Workman purchased the vehicle in good faith and for fair value. He has and will continue to cooperate fully with the authorities’ investigation,” Heftman said. “While he respectfully disagrees with the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s ruling, the litigation remains at a very early stage and he will not comment further on this pending litigation at this time.”
After Workman petitioned the Supreme Court, federal prosecutors charged an American living in Switzerland with stealing the car from Lieske, fraudulently exporting it to France where it was restored and then selling it to Workman in 2015.
Christopher Gardner, however, has not yet been arrested. At federal prosecutors’ direction, the car has remained in protective custody at the Massachusetts’ business where it was reimported to the United States.
The original engine, which a French mechanic hid from Gardner when he didn’t pay for work on it, was recovered by the FBI, which is holding it at its Milwaukee office. The indictment says Gardner stamped a fake serial number on a different engine to make it appear as the correct one for the car.
Story headed for the screen
If Mueller and Ford prevail in court, they could not only get their hands on the Talbot Lago but could also get damages.
Ford, who filed his own briefs in the cases and made the oral argument at the Supreme Court, said Tuesday he was very happy with the court’s decision.
“I’m pleased with the decision. It’s unanimous. It’s important,” he said. While admitting the subject matter helped get the court’s attention, Ford believes “the same legal outcome is warranted even if this was a stolen jar of mayonnaise.”
While the ruling remands the case back to trial court, it may also prompt a different ending. Ford said he and Mueller “are in honorable settlement talks about a resolution.”
Ford said there’s been tremendous interest in the story and that there will be some kind of TV or film production about it, though he said it was too early to discuss details.
He understands that Workman feels bad about getting snookered in the purchase but said he should sue his broker and the broker should sue Gardner.
“Typically, you return stolen property and go after the bad guy,” Ford said, “not turn the posse back on the theft victim.”