A federal appeals court has upheld the growing consensus that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) confers jurisdiction over foreign state actors in possession of art allegedly looted by and/or overseen by the Nazis. Upholding last year’s District Court decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit affirmed the ruling in De Csepel v. Republic of Hungary that denied several Budapest museums’ motion to dismiss, while allowing the Republic of Hungary itself out of the case. This is the heirs second successful trip to the appellate court, where their claims were upheld in 2013. The case is the subject of a chapter in my newly-released book A Tragic Fate--Law and Ethics in the Battle Over Nazi-Looted Art (ABA Publishing).
Read More
Topics:
Berlin,
David de Csepel,
Angela Maria Herzog,
Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act,
Baron Herzog,
Budapest University of Technology and Economics,
Hungarian National Gallery,
SPK,
Stiftung Preussischer Kulturbesitz,
Budapest Museum of Fine Arts,
FSIA,
expropriation exception”,
Cassirer v. Kingdom of Spain,
Federal Republic of Germany,
András Herzog,
Welfenschatz,
genocide
Expropriation Exception Saves Case, But District Court Holds Commercial Activity Exception Does Not Apply, Claims to Two of the Paintings at Issue are Dismissed as Well
The ongoing litigation between the heirs of Baron Mor Lipot Herzog and several state owned Hungarian museums has produced a new decision interpreting the scope of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), a frequent tool used to seek jurisdiction over Nazi-looted art claims brought in U.S. federal court. Relying on Supreme Court and D.C. Circuit cases in the last few months, the U.S. District Court held that claims for all but two of the paintings at issue can proceed under the FSIA’s “expropriation exception” codified in 28 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(3), but that the FSIA’s “commercial activity exception”—which the D.C. Circuit had held applicable in 2013 to the same case—could not be invoked based on the facts in the record developed in discovery. De Csepel v. Republic of Hungary, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32111 (March 14, 2016).
Read More
Topics:
David de Csepel,
commercial activity exception,
Hungary,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act,
Budapest University of Technology and Economics,
Hungarian National Gallery,
Budapest Museum of Fine Arts,
expropriation exception”,
Restitution,
World War II
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit restored last week claims by heirs of Lilly Cassirer against the Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection for the return of the Camille Pissarro painting Rue St. Honoré, après-midi, êffet de pluie.
Read More
Topics:
Nuremberg laws,
Schwabinger Kunstfund,
Cornelius Gurlitt,
Lilly Cassirer,
California Code of Civil Procedure § 338(c),
Dorothy Nelson,
Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection,
Julius Schoeps,
Rue St. Honoré après-midi êffet de pluie,
Claude Cassirer,
Von Saher v. Norton Simon,
de Csepel,
Jacques Goudstikker,
California Code of Civil Procedure § 354.3,
Gurlitt Collection,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act,
Hans Sachs,
Von Saher v. Norton Simon Museum of Art at Pasaden,
Madame Soler,
Bundesgerichtshof,
Hildebrand Gurlit,
Entartete Kunst,
Hans-Heinrich Thyssen-Bornemisza,
Hungarian National Gallery,
Nazis,
Munich,
Deutches Historisches Museum,
FSIA,
Preemption,
Gurlitt,
Harry Pregerson,
Restitution,
field preemption,
Marei Von Saher,
Herzog collection,
Bavaria,
Claudia Seger-Thomschitz,
Looted Art,
World War II,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities,
Pinakothek der Moderne,
degenerate art,
Altmann v. Republic of Austria,
578 F.3d 1016,
Freistaat Bayern,
beschlagnahmte Kunst,
Camille Pissarro,
Kim McLane Wardlaw,
Nürnberger Gesetze,
Raubkunst,
Museum of Fine Arts Boston,
Cassirer v. Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection,
verschollene Kunst,
Kunstfund München
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
Raising another hurdle to restitution claims, the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles against the Norton Simon Museum to the remnants of the famed Jacques Goudstikker collection, on the grounds that her case is preempted by the United States’ foreign affairs doctrine. In an unusually apologetic decision, the court ruled that regardless of the merits of her claims, the law of foreign affairs makes the dispute inappropriate for resolution by civil litigation.
Read More
Topics:
Terezin Declaration,
Norton Simon Museum,
Hungary,
Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection,
Jacques Goudstikker,
Cassirer,
Hungarian National Gallery,
George Stroganoff-Scherbatoff,
Holocaust Victims Redress Act,
Restitution,
Marei Von Saher,
World War II,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities,
Lucas Cranach the Elder,
Rue St. Honoré,
Camille Pissarro,
Göring,
Soviet Union,
Washington Principles,
California Code of Civil Procedure 354.3
