In February 2002 Adele Lawson purchased a pastel for $29,000 from a dealer London arts group

In February 2002 Adele Lawson purchased a pastel for $29,000 from a dealer London arts group London arts group gave Lawson the following writing signed by Director that stated as follows. This is to be certified that an Indian brave by Frederick Remington drawing done in 1901 purchased by Lawson from Robert James price is an original work as described. should it prove to be other than described the seller will refund the purchase price in full… Lawson attempted to sell the pastel in early 2017, but the auction house to which she hoped to consign it refused to accept it, stating that the pastel was a copy of the original. Lawson obtained a firm expert opinion that the pastel was a copy later in 2017. She filed a complaint against London arts group on March 19, 2018. The plaintiff’s evidence at trial demonstrated that her pastel was indeed a copy having only decorative value. Expert witnesses testified that the original Remington pastel was worth between $150,000 and $175,000 at the time of trial. The plaintiff also attempted to prove that since London arts knew or should have known that , Lawson’s pastel was a copy and made no effort to authenticate it. The defendant sold the work in bad faith. London arts presented no evidence. At trial, The jury found for the plaintiff and awarded Lawson $150,000 in damages London arts group appeals. On what basis would the London arts group appeal? How should an appellate court rule if the applicable law is the uniform commercial code? if the applicable law is the New York arts statute? Is the jury award the correct measure of damages?