Sture Graffman entered into a contract with Miguel Espel whereby Espel and his company (MTS) became the exclusive agent for the promotion and sale of Graffman’s Picasso painting. Espel asked his brother-in-law, Michael Delecea, to help in the sale of the painting. The painting was sent to Delecea in New York, and Delecea contacted the Avanti Gallery. The gallery owners found a buyer for the painting, and the painting was sold for $875,000. Delecea sent Espel $550,000 and used $200,000 of the proceeds to pay off Espel’s debts. Graffman never received any of the money. Subsequently, Graffman brought an action seeking the recovery of the painting or sufficient compensatory damages. Is the entrustment rule applicable? Was the buyer’s title to the painting void? How do you think the court handled the dispute?