One of the longest running art restitution litigations in the United States has been dismissed for a second time, with another appeal likely to follow. The heirs of Lilly Cassirer Neubauer have been pursuing the return of Camille Pissarro’s Rue St. Honoré, après-midi, êffet de pluie from the Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection in Madrid for more than ten years, but on June 4, 2015 the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles ruled that the Spanish museum has acquired full title to the painting by adverse possession. The key aspect of the decision is the court’s resolution of the choice of law question, namely, should California law or Spanish law apply to the question of who owns the painting? After a lengthy analysis the court determined that Spanish law applies, and that the museum has possessed the painting long enough to have become the owner regardless of the fact that it was sold under duress. So now a case that has already been to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals twice will almost certainly head back a third time. The court concluded its decision by appealing to the parties to “pause, reflect, and consider whether it would be appropriate to work towards a mutually-agreeable resolution of this action, in light of Spain’s acceptance of the Washington Conference Principles and the Terezin Declaration, and, specifically, its commitment to achieve “just and fair solutions” for victims of Nazi persecution.” But it is hard to see why that would happen. Notwithstanding the dictates of the Washington Principles, the Collection has been quite content to resist the claim. Now that it has won, it is hard to imagine it suddenly taking a different view.
Read More
Topics:
Lilly Cassirer Neubauer,
Terezin Declaration,
Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection,
Rue St. Honoré après-midi êffet de pluie,
Jacques Goudstikker,
California Code of Civil Procedure § 354.3,
Nazi-looted art,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act,
Washington Conference Principles,
FSIA,
adverse possession,
expropriation exception”,
Restitution,
Marei Von Saher,
sovereign immunity,
Jakob Schweidwimmer,
World War II,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities,
Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws § 222,
Altmann v. Republic of Austria,
Camille Pissarro,
foreign affairs doctrine,
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals,
Museums,
Baron Hans-Heinrich Thyssen- Bornemisza,
28 U.S.C. § 1605,
Welfenschatz
The release last week of The Woman in Gold, the feature film adaptation of The Lady in Gold by Anne Marie O’Connor, starring Helen Mirren and Ryan Reynolds as Maria Altmann and her attorney E. Randol Schoenberg, respectively, as well as Tatiana Maslany as the younger Altmann and Daniel Brühl as Austrian journalist Hubertus Czernin, is an important opportunity to reflect on the legal importance of the case. Even today, the case provides lessons about the way some victims are still treated, and how one individual can make sure the past is never forgotten. The looting of Jewish art collections was a concerted effort whose prominence should never be forgotten. And perhaps even more, it robs those who did survive of the dignity of remembering their family experiences. Consider: the next time you gather with your extended family, look around the room. Pick something that you’re accustomed to seeing when the family meets. Now, imagine it had been stolen or surrendered under duress, and was hanging on the wall of a national collection that denied it had been taken. How would you feel? This is the dilemma faced by many claimants, and it is precisely why Altmann matters so much.
Read More
Topics:
Maria Altmann,
The Lady in Gold,
Adele Bloch-Bauer,
The Woman in Gold,
Daniel Brühl,
Germany,
Nazi-looted art,
Academy of Fine Arts,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act,
Hitler,
Tatiana Maslany,
Anne Marie O’Connor,
Supreme Court,
A Few Good Men,
Belvedere,
E. Randol Schoenberg,
World Jewish Congress,
Stiftung Preussischer Kulturbesitz,
Ryan Reynolds,
FSIA,
expropriation exception”,
Restitution,
Neue Galerie,
World War II,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities,
Switzerland,
Ferdinand Bloch-Bauer,
Helen Mirren,
Museums,
Fritz Altmann,
Gustav Klimt,
Vienna,
Welfenschatz,
Hubertus Czernin,
Ronald Lauder,
Austrian National Gallery
A quirk of parliamentary procedure is that any bill in Congress exists only for so long as that particular Congress is in session. This week, the 114th Congress took its seats, meaning that any bill not passed by both the House of Representatives and the Senate, and signed by the President, is a dead letter. This is the fate of many, many bills—indeed most. 
Read More
Topics:
Legislation,
Resale Royalties,
Chuck Close,
Moral Rights,
Nazi-looted art,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act,
28 U.S. § 1605,
Art Law Day,
114th Congress,
22 U.S.C. § 2459,
City of Amsterdam,
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY),
FSIA,
expropriation exception”,
droit de suite,
IFSA,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities,
Senate,
House of Representatives,
Immunity from Seizure Act,
President,
Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity
The German Advisory Commission for the Return of Cultural Property Seized as a Result of Nazi Persecution, Especially Jewish Property (Beratende Kommission) has issued its latest decision concerning allegedly Nazi-looted art in German museums. For the second case in a row after the widely (and wisely) derided opinion not to restitute the Welfenschatz or Guelph Treasure at the Stiftung Preussischer Kulturbesitz in Berlin, the commission (known for its presiding member, former German Supreme Constitutional Court judge Jutta Limbach) has recommended against restitution, this time over the claim by heirs of Clara Levy to The Three Graces (Drei Grazien) by Lovis Corinth (1902/1904). The decision (available only in German) is riddled with poor logic and basic historical errors. In short, while it may be that the painting was indeed delivered to Clara Levy’s daughter in the United States at Clark’s express instruction, that is far less clear than the commission states, and its decision further makes a number of assumptions about the circumstances of Jews in occupied or about-to-be occupied territories that undermine its credibility considerably.
Read More
Topics:
Berlin,
Else Bergmann,
Schleifmühle,
Hildebrand Gurlitt,
Cornelius Gurlitt,
Ludwig Levy,
Fritz Levy,
Rita Hubbard,
Germany,
Nazi-looted art,
bill of lading,
Especially Jewish Property,
Buchholz Gallery,
Madame Soler,
German Advisory Commission for the Return of Cultu,
San Francisco,
Entartete Kunst,
Beratende Kommission,
Stiftung Preussischer Kulturbesitz,
FSIA,
Curt Valentin,
expropriation exception”,
Gurlitt,
Restitution,
Max Huggler,
Mendelssohn-Bartholdy,
Clara Levy,
Sigfried Rosengart,
Luxembourg,
Henry Zacharias,
Compagnie Generale Transatlantique Hol Lesquette,
World War II,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities,
Pinakothek der Moderne,
degenerate art,
beschlagnahmte Kunst,
Jutta Limbach,
Kunstmuseum Bern,
Drei Grazien,
Pablo Picasso,
Lovis Corinth,
Museums,
Three Graces,
Bavarian State Painting Collections,
Federal Republic of Germany,
Paula Levy,
Kurt Buchholz,
Welfenschatz,
Limbach Commission,
New York,
Bayerische Staatsgemäldesammlungen
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has dismissed claims for ownership of Madame Soler by Pablo Picasso, currently at the Pinakothek der Moderne in Munich. Just as the relevance of Judge Jed Rakoff’s comments over another art restitution case brought by the heirs of Paul von Mendelssohn Bartholdy unexpectedly came to the fore recently, Judge Rakoff’s decision is now the most recent in a line of frustrations for the heirs of Mendelssohn Bartholdy, a victim of Nazi persecution in Berlin in the 1930s. The ramifications of this case may be fairly narrow, however, as the case was premised on allegations of specific transactions in New York rather than general allegations about the conduct of Germany. The claimants could appeal, or perhaps turn to the Limbach Commission if they could be heard (the Pinakothek is a subdivision of Germany for jurisdictional analysis, but it’s unclear at first blush if the Commission would view this claim as within its province).
Read More
Topics:
Paul von Mendelssohn Bartholdy,
Berlin,
commercial activity exception,
Cornelius Gurlitt,
Florence Kesselstatt,
Judge Jed Rakoff,
Halldor Soehner,
Saint-Jean-Cap-Ferrat,
Julius Schoeps,
Upper East Side,
Prussia,
Max Liebermann,
Night Café,
Gurlitt Collection,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act,
Preussen,
France,
State Paintings Collection,
Madame Soler,
Museum of Modern Art,
Edelgard von Lavergne-Peguilhen,
Van Gogh,
Munich,
Justin K. Thannhauser,
FSIA,
expropriation exception”,
Nazi persecution,
Boy Leading a Horse,
Restitution,
David Toren,
Bayerische Staatsgemäldesammlung,
Bavarian State Ministry for Education and Culture,
Free State of Bavaria,
World War II,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities,
Pinakothek der Moderne,
Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Bildung und Kult,
Bundesländer,
Altmann v. Republic of Austria,
Freistaat Bayern,
Le Moulin de la Galette,
Kurt Martin,
München,
Pablo Picasso,
Federal Republic of Germany,
Limbach Commission,
Wissenschaft und Kunst
The DC Circuit Court of Appeals has reinstated the entire set of claims brought by the Herzog heirs against the Hungarian National Gallery, the Budapest Museum of Fine Arts, the Museum of Applied Arts, and the Budapest University of Technology and Economics. The appellate decision focuses on the claim that an agreement was reached after WWII to hold the paintings for their owners, not the claims relating to their wartime fate. In so doing, the court pushed to the side a whole range of defenses for sovereign defendants that have been increasingly successful. The court also reinstated claims to ownership of 11 works whose title was previously litigated, in an opinion that sets a low bar for collateral attacks on foreign judgments.
Read More
Topics:
David de Csepel,
Nazi Germany,
Angela Maria Herzog,
Hungary,
WWII,
Viktor Orban,
res judicata,
Julia Alice Herzog,
Budapest University of Technology and Economics,
Baron Mor Lipot Herzog,
Hungarian National Gallery,
Jori Finkel,
Budapest Museum of Fine Arts,
Adolf Eichmann,
FSIA,
expropriation exception”,
Restitution,
28 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(2),
28 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(3),
World War II,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities,
Alison Frankel,
András Herzog,
Janos Lazar,
Museum of Applied Arts
