A gold, diamond-encrusted eagle that was carved in 2009 by a Loon Lake artist and allegedly stolen in 2016 is back in the news, after a major insurance company recently lost its bid to have a lawsuit involving the sculpture tossed out.
Ron Shore commissioned the Golden Eagle as the main prize in an international treasure hunt that was designed to raise money for cancer research. The statue, which was of solid gold and weighed 18 pounds, was the largest casting of gold in the last 400 years, and was encrusted with diamonds.
The head of the eagle was of 18 karat white gold, and the eyes were made of matching pear-shaped diamonds. It also featured an Atocha Star emerald weighing 17.2 karats, which was retrieved from the shipwreck of the Nuestra Señora de Atocha, and set in the statue’s base. The statue had an appraised value of $930,450.
In May 2016 Shore took the Golden Eagle and a smaller silver eagle to an event in Delta. He later reported to the Delta Police Department that as he was unloading the eagles from a backpack into his car, he was attacked by unknown assailants, who took both eagles. Neither have been recovered.
In an interview with Black Press in 2020, Peters — whose work can be found in galleries around the world — said that the Golden Eagle did not appear to have been melted down, and that it was not believed to be in North America.
Shore reported the loss to the insurance companies through which he had coverage amounting to $400,000 for the golden statute and $53,750 for the silver eagle. The insurers denied coverage, saying the statues were being transported in a manner Shore “knew or ought to have known was in contravention of the policy.”
Lloyd’s Underwriters applied to have the case dismissed, saying delays caused by the plaintiff (Shore) have been “inordinate” and “inexcusable.” Endeavour Insurance Services Ltd. and Hub International have also been named as defendants.
In a ruling on Jan. 31, 2025 that was posted online on Feb. 11, Justice Lisa Warren agreed with the defendants that the delays were unreasonable, but said “it is in the interests of justice to allow the claim to proceed.”
“I have decided that there is not enough to tip the balance in favour of dismissal, although this was a close call,” she wrote.
The policy contained conditions, one of which provided that coverage is excluded unless the insured articles are in the close personal custody and control of the assured, and an officer or representative of the assured, at all times. Shore argued that he had an associate with him, but the insurers said she was not there during the reported robbery.
A default judgment was entered against Lloyd’s in December 2018, but court documents indicate that Lloyd’s had been waiting for more information from the plaintiff and had not been informed that the matter was proceeding through the courts. The default judgment was set aside in April 2019.
The most recent court decision states that since that decision, Shore has done “nothing more than serve a list of documents (June 2021) and file an amended pleading (January 2023).”
Discussion arose between the two sides in spring 2023 about going to trial, but Shore’s lawyer was not available until November 2023. The plaintiff did not raise the issue again until August 2024, according to the court ruling, after which the defendants applied to have the case dismissed.
Justice Warren said some of the delays have been due to Shore, who, because of financial constraints, tried to do some of the legal work on his own. She said he also had several health challenges.
Warren said although there were other delays for which she can find no excuse, “there is no evidence that the defendants took issue with the pace of litigation until the summer of 2024” nor have they pushed for a trial date. She added that there was no evidence indicating that the delays in the case were “intentional or tactical.”
With files from Barbara Roden.
