On the heels of the St. Louis Art Museum’s victory against the civil forfeiture action over the Mask of Ka-Nefer-Nefer, the question arises what the museum will do with the lawsuit it filed in 2011 concerning the mask. That lawsuit, The Art Museum Subdistrict of the Metropolitan Zoological Park and Museum District of the City of Saint Louis and the County of Saint Louis, (the “SLAM Case”) filed before the civil forfeiture action that was the subject of last week’s opinion(United States vs. Mask of Ka-Nefer-Nefer, hereafter the “Forfeiture Action”), sought a declaratory judgment on several issues. This tactic is not uncommon when two parties disagree over a claim; essentially the party who would ordinarily be the defendant (here the possessor of the property, the museum), seeks offensively a declaration about the parties’ rights. Because of its recent victory in the Forfeiture Action, the museum’s best move may be to dismiss the SLAM Case now, rather than litigate ownership questions that it no longer has to answer.
Nicholas O'Donnell
Recent Posts
Topics: Mask of Ka-Nefer-Nefer, Mohamed Ibrahim, St. Louis Art Museum, Department of Justice, Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e), the Art Law Report, 19 U.S.C. § 1595a, United States, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Customs, Minister of Antiquities, Civil Forfeiture, Ancient Egypt
The Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit has affirmed the dismissal of the U.S. government’s attempt to seize the Mask of Ka-Nefer-Nefer from the St. Louis Art Museum. Despite the government’s persistent characterization the mask as stolen before it entered the country, the civil forfeiture case has been rebuffed. The narrow issue was whether the trial court had properly denied the government’s request to amend its complaint after an initial challenge, but as the 8th Circuit put it, “Underlying that issue is an attempt to expand the government’s forfeiture powers at the likely expense of museums and other good faith purchasers in the international marketplace for ancient artifacts.” That latter question will have to wait another day, because the case was resolved on the government’s missed deadlines and nothing more.
Topics: Mask of Ka-Nefer-Nefer, St. Louis Art Museum, Department of Justice, Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e), the Art Law Report, Restitution, 19 U.S.C. § 1595a, United States, Antiquities, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Customs, Civil Forfeiture, Ancient Egypt
The Gurlitt Task Force has issued its first public conclusion about the status of work amongst the collection found in Cornelius Gurlitt's apartment. Chair Ingebeborg Berggreen-Merkel issued a statement today that (my translation):
Topics: Schwabinger Kunstfund, Hildebrand Gurlitt, Cornelius Gurlitt, Gurlitt Task Force, Nazi-looted art, Gurlitt Collection, Entartete Kunst, Munich art trove, Anne Sinclair, NS Raubkunst, Restitution, World War II, Kunstmuseum Bern, Washington Principles, Sitzende Frau, Kunstfund München, Henri Matisse, Paul Rosenberg
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit restored on June 6, 2014 the claims by Marei von Saher against the Norton Simon Museum in Pasadena for the paintings Adam and Eve by Lucas Cranach the Elder. The appeals court followed its decision in Cassirer v. Kingdom of Spain in December of last year, concerning the painting Rue Saint-Honoré, après-midi, effet de pluie by Camille Pissarro that was owned at one time by Lilly Cassirer, a Jewish collector who fled Germany in 1939. While the panel of judges vacated the Von Saher dismissal that was premised on the idea that California’s revised statute of limitations was unconstitutional (instead finding that the law and claims withstand that scrutiny), the divided 2-1 panel sent the case back to the district court to determine if the claims were nonetheless barred under the “act of state doctrine”. One dissenting judge would have upheld the dismissal on the grounds that the case would call into question Von Saher’s compensation from the Dutch government such that that would violate the foreign affairs doctrine. That split on the act of state doctrine partially answers the lingering question of why Von Saher, argued the same day as Cassirer concerning the same California law, had gone undecided six months after Cassirer was resolved.
Topics: Dutch Secretary for Education Culture and Science, Norton Simon Museum, Alois Miedl, Lilly Cassirer, Norton Simon Art Foundation, Rue Saint-Honoré après-midi effet de pluie, Jacques Goudstikker, Howard N. Spiegler, Fred Anthony Rowley, George Stroganoff-Scherbatoff, Hermann Goring, Harry Pregerson, Restitution, Marei Von Saher, Jr., World War II, Foreign Sovereign Immunities, act of state doctrine, Cassirer v. Kingdom of Spain, Lucas Cranach the Elder, Camille Pissarro, Dorothy Wright Nelson, http://www.bna.com., Kim McLane Wardlaw, Soviet Union, foreign affairs doctrine, California Section 354.3 of Code of Civil Procedur, Von Saher v. Norton Simon Museum of Art
Reflecting on the recent argument by the Detroit Institute of Arts that the city of Detroit cannot legally sell, let alone be forced to sell, the artwork in the museum to satisfy creditor, some overlapping terminology creates the possibility of an important confusion. Particularly in the realm of deaccessioning, this distinctions are quite important. Meanwhile, the state of Michigan today approved its part of the “Grand Bargain” to subsidize the bankruptcy to avoid sale or encumbrance of the artwork.
Topics: Donn Zaretsky, Roberta Smith, Rose Art Museum, Lee Rosenbaum, Columbia University, Deaccessioning, Detroit Institute of Arts, Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, Association of Art Museum Directors, Michigan, Albright-Knox Gallery, New York Times, Detroit Bankruptcy, AAMD, Edward Hopper, Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts, grand bargain, Brandeis University, Barnes Foundation
I took part in last week’s panel discussion at the Sotheby’s Institute entitled “Art Fairs: An Irresistible Force In The Art World?” Moderated by Judith Prowda, the panel was comprised of Edward Winkleman, Elizabeth Dee, Richard Lehun, and me. We reviewed the financial, practical, ethical, and legal effects that the expansion of art fairs has had on the trade.
Topics: Eileen Kinsella, Sotheby’s Institute of Art, Entertainment Arts & Sports Law Section, Kristina Nazarevskaia, Richard Lehun, Elizabeth Dee, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, Stropheus Art Law, Events, Edward Winkleman, Art Fairs, Indpendent, New York State Bar Association, Judith B. Prowda, galleryIntell, Nicholas M. O'Donnell, ArtNet
After Judge Rhodes denied (as predicted) the expansive relief requested by creditors in the Detroit bankruptcy to perform a top-to-bottom appraisal of the collection of the Detroit Institute of Arts, attention has focused on those creditors’ objection to the “grand bargain” within the overall plan of adjustment. The creditors (and some academics) have argued that the grand bargain is a “preferential transfer,” that it puts some creditors (pension holders) in a better position than other creditors (lenders, in particular) in violation of bankruptcy principles.
Topics: Old Master, Deaccession, the Ford Foundation, Mark Stryker, Chapter 9, the Fred A. and Barbara M. Erb Family Foundation, the Hudson-Webber Foundation, 11 U.S.C. § 904, Impressionism, Amedeo Modigliani, Michelangelo, the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, the William Davidson Foundation, Judge Rhodes, Christie's, valuation, Scheme for the Decoration of the Ceiling of the Si, Appraisal, Modernist Art, Detroit, the McGregor Fund, Eugene Driker, Detroit Institute of Arts, Bankruptcy, Gerald Rosen, the Kresge Foundation, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, Detroit Emergency Manager, Kevyn Orr, Detroit Free Press, eligibility, Detroit Bankruptcy, the Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan
Among the many legacies of the Gurlitt saga is a renewed focus on the importance of Nazi-approved art dealers like Karl Haberstock to the expropriation, outlawing, and re-sale of art either owned by Jewish collectors or which was thematically disapproved by the Nazi state. Relatedly, it has served as a reminder of the often cursory review that many of these men received after the war, and the acceptance of their proffered explanations, like those of Hildebrand Gurlitt, that “everything was destroyed in a bombing attack.” Now, the German Central Institute for Art history is set to make public the records of Adolf Weinmüller and his eponymous auction house (later renamed Neumeister).
Topics: Meike Hopp, Schwabinger Kunstfund, Was einmal war, Hildebrand Gurlitt, Cornelius Gurlitt, Zentralinstitut für Kunstgeschichte, Lost Art Database, Schwabinger Taskforce, Gurlitt Task Force, Nazi-looted art, Gurlitt Collection, Karl Haberstock, Kende, Entartete Kunst, Munich, Restitution, Wien, World War II, degenerate art, www.lostart.de, München, Adolf Weinmüller, Neumeister Auction House, Aryanized, Sophie Lille, Unser Wien ‘Arisierung’ auf Österreich, Nazi Raubkunst, Vienna, Tina Walzer
While the appeal by Google of an order to take down any copies of “Innocence of Muslims” awaits a decision by the Ninth Circuit on Google’s request for rehearing, there has been a development back down in the District Court. Cindy Lee Garcia initially sought a preliminary injunction against Google to remove the availability of the video on YouTube, but she also sued many whom she alleged was the producer of the movie—Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, aka Mark Youssef—alleging that she had acted in a project she never knew would be used for the ultimate film, and that her dialogue was dubbed with the words that later caused such uproar and deadly violence. When the preliminary injunction was denied by the District Court (in large part because of the court’s finding that she could not prevail on the merits of her copyright claim that she held an independent right in her acting performance), it appears that the remaining case was stayed as she went up on appeal of the injunction ruling.
Topics: Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, YouTube, Innocence of Muslims, Mark Youssef, Copyright, independent performance, Cindy Lee Garcia, Google
A reminder that I’ll be taking part in an event sponsored by the Entertainment Arts & Sports Law Section of the New York State Bar Association on Tuesday, May 27, 2014, to be held at the Sotheby’s Institute of Art at 570 Lexington Avenue starting at 6:30 p.m. The event description is copied below, and registration is available here. I hope to see you there!
Topics: Sotheby’s Institute of Art, Entertainment Arts & Sports Law Section, Richard Lehun, Elizabeth Dee, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, Stropheus Art Law, Events, Selling Contemporary Art: How to Navigate the Evol, Edward Winkleman, Art Fairs, Indpendent, New York State Bar Association, Judith B. Prowda, Nicholas M. O'Donnell, Visual Arts and the Law: A Handbook for Profession
