In 2018, John Hock completed a 53-foot steel sculpture, Prometheus III. The work was displayed in Franconia Sculpture Park, an institution Hock co-founded and his then-employer. In 2019, Franconia terminated Hock, and he agreed to remove Prometheus III from the park. By late 2023, he had not done so, and Franconia, believing the sculpture was abandoned, disassembled it and sold it for scrap. Hock sued for violations of the Visual Artists Rights Act, a federal statute that protects artists’ “moral rights,” including the right not to have certain artworks destroyed. He also raised several state-law claims.
Hock’s expert witness is Rachael Blackburn Cozad. Franconia filed a motion to exclude Cozad’s testimony.
Fine Arts Expert Witness
Rachael Blackburn Cozad has over thirty years’ experience in the fine arts field. She has a Bachelor of Arts degree in art history from Texas Christian University, a Master of Arts degree in art history from California State University, Los Angeles, and Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (“USPAP”) certification.
Discussion by the Court
Cozad examined Prometheus III’s fair market value with two methods. The first method was the sales comparison approach, which sets the value by analyzing sales of the artist’s similar artworks. Cozad found only one comparable piece, the Prometheus III maquette, which sold for $12,00 in 2001.
The second method was the cost approach, which estimates the price to recreate or replace an artwork. Cozad received information about Prometheus III’s “materials, dimensions, labor etc.” from Hock and then consulted two “fabricators and foundries” for estimates.
Ultimately, she concluded that Prometheus III’s fair market value was $1,300,000, which was a number in the middle of the two fabricators’ estimates, increased by 30% to account for Hock’s time and expertise.
Cozad included an “Accompanying Budget Note,” which identified the market value of two large public sculptures to show that a valuation around $1,000,000 was “not unusual.” Lastly, Cozad opined that Prometheus III “qualifies as a work of ‘stature’” under VARA.
Analysis
1. Sales Comparison Approach
Cozad did not rely on the sales comparison approach to generate the sculpture’s fair market value. The report described a “combined approach,” but it determined the final value with reference to the cost approach alone. As a result, the sales comparison portions was excluded because they will not help the jury understand the evidence or determine a fact in issue.
Because she did not use the sales comparison approach in calculating market value and testified to its deficiencies in this circumstance, testimony about that method would not help the trier of fact understand the evidence or determine material facts.
Cozad testified that scaling was “a very common practice . . . especially . . . when artists make things that are similar but in different sizes,” and that it is “generally an acceptable approach for appraisers to use when there’s a shortage of good comparable sales data.” The Court found this statement insufficient to show reliable principles and methods. To start, there is the commonsense objection that an artwork’s value is unlikely to increase in proportion to its size.
Cozad cited no case or other authority where an appraiser used the scaling approach. Cozad explained why she judged Prometheus III against only one work: Large sculptures like this one tend to be site-specific, so they are rarely publicly traded; they are costly to relocate; and they can suffer damage during disassembly as part of the moving process. She considered Hock’s other sales but concluded they were poor comparators.
2. Cost Approach Valuation
Franconia sought to exclude the cost approach valuation portion for two reasons. First, it argued that replacement cost will often not reasonably approximate fair market value. However, the cost approach is an approved
method under USPAP guidelines. Cozad testified cogently about why she adopted it—namely, the other approved methods were less applicable.
Second, Franconia argued that Cozad inappropriately relied on and repeated hearsay from other experts, the individual fabricators who estimated the cost to replace Prometheus III. She testified that certified professional art appraisers “commonly communicate with art fabricators as part of their appraisals” and “reasonably rely on information obtained from art fabricators in forming their appraisal opinions,” especially when applying the cost approach to large steel sculptures. The problem is not reasonable reliance but that her opinion is not truly independent of the fabricators’ conclusions. For these reasons, Cozad’s cost approach valuation was not admissible and therefore excluded by the Court.
3. Accompanying Budget Note
Franconia sought to exclude the “Accompanying Budget Note,” which provided the commission and appraisal prices of two other large public sculptures. The Court agreed. The fact that other sculptures are worth a million dollars is material to Prometheus III’s value only if those pieces are sufficiently similar to Prometheus III.
4. Work of Stature
Franconia sought to exclude Cozad’s opinion that Prometheus III qualifies as having “stature” under VARA. Other courts have explained that an artist’s general reputation, past works, and community recognition are relevant to the subject artwork’s stature. As a result, the Court refused to exclude this portion.
Held
The Court granted in part and denied in part Franconia’s motion to exclude certain testimony of Plaintiff’s expert Rachael Blackburn Cozad.
Key Takeaway
Even if Rule 703 were no barrier to admissibility, Cozad’s opinion would run afoul of Rule 403, because the probative value of her contribution—the arithmetic—would be substantially outweighed by a danger of prejudice from considering the fabricators’ hearsay valuations.
Case Details:
| Case Caption: | Hock V. Franconia Sculpture Park |
| Docket Number: | 0:24cv3546 |
| Court Name: | United States District Court, Minnesota |
| Order Date: | June 02, 2026 |
Leave a Reply