I'm becoming more and more confused by the Fisk lawsuit.
First, Judge Lyle ruled in July that Fisk cannot sell O'Keeffe's Radiator Building or Hartley's Painting No. 3 (at least that's how Jonathan Marx reported it in The Nashville Tennessean).
So she set a Sept. trial date on the museum's claims that Fisk violated the conditions of O'Keeffe's gift — and therefore that the entire Stieglitz Collection should be turned over to the museum.
When Fisk and the museum tried to settle those claims (in a manner that would have put about $30 million in the school's coffers), she rejected it, in large part because she believed a better offer had emerged from the Crystal Bridges Museum.
But now, when Fisk comes to get her blessing to accept that better offer, she sets another trial date . . . for February of next year. This, despite the fact that the university has said it expects to run out of money some time in December.
I suppose it's possible that the news reports aren't accurately describing the nature of Hobbs's rulings, but, if they are, I'm at a loss to understand what's going on.
UPDATE: It's not just me.
