From Murder To Museums: The Pursuit of Nazi Looted Art - August 16 Southampton NY

Please join me in Southampton New York on August 16 at the Rogers Memorial Library at noon for a presentation on Nazi looted art, the legacy that it has left our nation's museums and cultural institutions, and the controversies over restitution that are now engaging our nation's courts.  Learn how Abraham Lincoln's contribution to international law is now being used to pursue artworks stolen by Adolph Hitler and the Nazi Regime.  To register online visit http://alpha2.suffolk.lib.ny.us/iii/calendar/month/C&P=%7C1&R=80 by phone (631) 283-0774 ext 523.


Raymond Dowd Nazi Art Looting Lecture August 16 Southampton NY by Ray Dowd on Scribd

www.dunnington.com
 Copyright law, fine art and navigating the courts. Attorney and AuthorCopyright Litigation Handbook (Thomson Reuters Westlaw 2015-2016) by Raymond J. Dowd
 

Austria's Holocaust Denial: Judge Korman and DA Morgenthau Were Right: Dead City III and 80 Other Artworks By Egon Schiele Were Stolen From Fritz Grunbaum

Egon Schiele's Dead City III - Stolen from Fritz Grunbaum

In 1998, District Attorney Robert Morgenthau seized Egon Schiele's Dead City III from the Museum of Modern Art in New York City.   Here's what Judge Edward Korman said about Fritz Grunbaum and the evidence that the Nazis looted his art collection in a concurring opinion he wrote while sitting by designation on the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Bakalar v. Vavra, 619 F.3d 136 (September 2, 2010)(the bolding is mine):

EDWARD R. KORMAN, District Judge, separately concurring:

Often, when a verdict after a trial is reversed, other issues will be addressed which, though they do not affect the result, are likely to arise again on remand. While such a discussion may constitute dicta, it is justified by the desire to avoid the burden and expense that would result from the repetition of uncorrected error. Whether to undertake such an exercise is, of course, discretionary. While my colleagues, for perhaps understandable reasons, decline to engage in it, I take a different view and write to address more fully Part III of the panel opinion, which takes issue with the district judge's finding that the Grunbaum heirs had failed to produce “any concrete evidence that the Nazis looted the Drawing or that it was otherwise taken from Grunbaum.” Bakalar v. Vavra, 2008 WL 4067335, at *8.

While the panel opinion observes that “[o]ur reading of the record suggests that there may be such evidence,” [Panel Opinion, ante at *9] it does not say what that evidence is, nor does it discuss the legal principles applicable to what is essentially a mixed question of law and fact. The district judge is left to comb the record without assistance, looking for evidence he did not see the first time around, and without guidance as to the legal principles that make the evidence particularly relevant. I write to fill this gap.

Grunbaum was arrested while attempting to flee from the Nazis. After his arrest, he never again had physical possession of any of his artwork, including the Drawing. The power of attorney, which he was forced to execute while in the Dachau concentration camp, divested him of his legal control over the Drawing. Such an involuntary divestiture of possession and legal control rendered any subsequent transfer void.

“Under American law and the law of many foreign states there is only one scenario in which a good-faith purchaser's claim of title is immediately recognized over that of the original owner. This scenario arises when the owner voluntarily parts with possession by the creation of a bailment, the bailee converts the chattel, and the nature of the bailment allows a reasonable buyer to conclude that the bailee is empowered to pass the owner's title.” Patricia Youngblood Reyhan, A Chaotic Palette: Conflict of Laws in Litigation Between Original Owners and Good-Faith Purchasers of Stolen Art, 50 Duke L.J. 955, 971 (2001) (emphasis added). The principle to which Professor Reyhan alludes is codified in more limited form in section 2-403(2) of the Uniform Commercial Code, which was adopted by New York, and which provides that “[a]ny entrusting of possession of goods to a merchant who deals in goods of that kind gives him power to transfer all rights of the entruster to a buyer in ordinary course of business.” No such voluntary entrustment took place here. Nor did Grunbaum's flight from the Nazis constitute a voluntary abandonment.

Section 2-403(1) of the Uniform Commercial Code, which addresses principally the consequences of the transfer of title, rather than mere possession, provides that a person with voidable title has the power to transfer good title to a good-faith purchaser for value, and provides four examples of circumstances in which this rule applies. “The key to the voidable title concept appears to be that the original transferor voluntarily relinquished possession of the goods and intended to pass title.” Franklin Feldman & Stephen E. Weil, Art Law § 11.1.3 (1986). The Feldman *149 & Weil treatise continues: “He may have been defrauded, or the check he received may have bounced, or he may have intended to sell it to Mr. X rather than to Mr. Y, but, nevertheless, he intended to pass title. In such cases, the transferor has an option to void the sale, but the transferee can pass good title. A person who acquired the goods from a thief, however, has no title and consequently neither he nor successive transferees can pass ownership.” Id.; see also Thomas M. Quinn, Quinn's Uniform Commercial Code Commentary and Law Digest § 2-403[A][6] (2d ed., 2002). Grunbaum never voluntarily intended to pass title to the Drawing. On the contrary, the circumstances strongly suggest that he executed the power of attorney with a gun to his head.

Nevertheless, the district judge, relying on U.C.C. § 2-403(1), concluded that “Galerie St. Etienne was a seller with voidable title to the Drawing, having acquired it from Galerie Gutekunst in 1956,” and that Bakalar, a good faith purchaser for value, acquired good title to the Drawing. 2008 WL 4067335, at *6. While the district judge did not identify the defect in the title acquired by Galerie Gutekunst, which rendered voidable the title it passed to Galerie St. Etienne, his conclusion that the title was voidable implicitly recognizes that there was some legal defect in the passage of title to the Drawing as it made its way from Grunbaum to the Galerie Gutekunst. Otherwise, the district judge would have had no basis to characterize as “voidable” the title the latter conveyed to the Galerie St. Etienne. This characterization, however, ignores the fact that, if the power of attorney signed by Grunbaum was involuntary, any subsequent transfer was void and not merely voidable.

This case is analogous to the circumstances in two reported cases. In Vineberg v. Bissonnette, 548 F.3d 50 (1st Cir.2008), aff'g 529 F.Supp.2d 300, 307 (D.R.I.2007), the Nazis issued an edict directing the Jewish owner of an art gallery to liquidate the gallery and its inventory after determining that he “lacked the requisite personal qualities to be an exponent of German culture.” Id. at 53. After unsuccessfully appealing this edict, the owner “surrendered to the inevitable,” and consigned most of the affected works to a government-approved purveyor. Id. The consigned pieces, including a painting by Franz Xaver Winterhalter known as “Mädchen aus den Sabiner Bergen” (“Girl from the Sabine Mountains”), were auctioned at prices below their fair market value. Fearing for his life, the owner fled Germany shortly after the forced sale. Consequently, he never retrieved the auction proceeds. Id. The district court had little trouble in concluding that the owner's “relinquishment of his property was anything but voluntary,” 529 F.Supp.2d at 307, and that holding was not challenged on appeal.

Similarly, in Menzel v. List, the Jewish owners of a painting by Marc Chagall entitled “Le Paysan a L'echelle” (“The Peasant and the Ladder”) left their apartment in Brussels when they fled in March, 1941, before the oncoming Nazis. 49 Misc.2d 300, 301-2, 267 N.Y.S.2d 804 (1966), modified as to damages, 28 A.D.2d 516, 279 N.Y.S.2d 608 (1st Dep't 1967), rev'd as to modification, 24 N.Y.2d 91, 298 N.Y.S.2d 979, 246 N.E.2d 742 (1969). The painting was seized by the Nazis, who left a certification or receipt “indicating that the painting, among other works of art, had been taken into ‘safekeeping.’ ” Id. at 301, 267 N.Y.S.2d 804. The New York State Supreme Court Justice hearing the case concluded that the painting had not been abandoned because it did not constitute “a voluntary relinquishment of a known right.” Id. at 305, 267 N.Y.S.2d 804. The *150 Justice continued: “The relinquishment here by the Menzels in order to flee for their lives was no more voluntary than the relinquishment of property during a holdup.” Id. Consequently, he ordered the current possessor of the painting, and good-faith purchaser, to either return it to Mrs. Menzel or pay her $22,500, its fair value at the time of the case. Moreover, he also held that the good-faith purchaser could recover the $22,500 for breach of warranty of title from the Perls Galleries, from whom the painting was purchased. In so doing, the Justice explained:

It is of no moment that Perls Galleries may have been a bona fide purchaser of the painting, in good faith and for value and without knowledge of the saga of the Menzels. No less is expected of an art gallery of distinction. Throughout the course of human history, the perpetration of evil has inevitably resulted in the suffering of the innocent, and those who act in good faith. And the principle has been basic in the law that a thief conveys no title as against the true owner.

Id. at 314-15, 267 N.Y.S.2d 804 (citations omitted).⁵

Based on the historical record of the time, to which reference has already been made, the power of attorney Grunbaum signed in the fourth month of his confinement in Dachau does not appear to be any more voluntary a relinquishment of his legal interest in the Drawing than the acts discussed in Vineberg and Menzel. Bakalar's suggestion that the power of attorney constituted a voluntary entrustment of property to his wife is a proposition that remains for him to prove. Unless he does so, even if Mrs. Grunbaum “subsequently transferred the Drawing to her sister, Mathilde Lukacs, in 1938, to prevent it from falling into the hands of the Nazis,” as Bakalar alleges, she could not convey valid title to the artwork. Significantly, the district judge made no finding that any entrustment for this purpose even took place.

On this score, Bakalar's amended complaint, which was filed on the eve of trial, posits two theories for what happened to the collection: 1) “that Elisabeth succeeded in hiding the [Drawing] from the Nazis prior to her deportation, and that her sister, Lukacs-Herzl, managed to take the collection with her into exile in Belgium,” or 2) “that after the Grunbaum's apartment was aryanized by the Nazis in 1938, the family's library and art collection were purchased by a Viennese antiquarian bookseller who lived in the same neighborhood for approximately $90, and that the Viennese bookseller then either sold or gave the collection to Lukacs-Herzl at some point thereafter.” (A-277.) Of course, the second alternative assumes that the property was taken by the Nazis, and Bakalar acknowledges that, even under the first theory, scholars believe it is unlikely that Lukacs-Herzl could have saved the entire collection given the circumstances under which she left Austria. Indeed, Grunbaum's heirs offered expert evidence consistent *151 with the premise that Lukacs-Herzl could not have removed or salvaged the paintings because “she was a Jewish woman who was interned in a Belgian work camp by the Nazis until 1944 after she fled Vienna together with her husband. It is more likely that a person like Kieslinger with direct ties to the Nazis took possession of the Grunbaum collection.” (A-1273.) Significantly, neither of the two theories posited by Bakalar are predicated on the assumption that Mrs. Grunbaum voluntarily gave over Fritz Grunbaum's art collection to either Lukacs-Herzl or the Nazis who aryanized her apartment.

Nor do the district court's findings of fact support Bakalar's argument “that someone in the Grunbaum family more likely than not exported the Drawing from Vienna.” The district judge merely speculated that “[t]he Drawing could have been one of the 417 drawings Elisabeth Grunbaum possibly exported ... in 1938,” or that the Drawing “could have been one of three drawings Lukacs's husband exported,” or that “it could have been” one of the three watercolors exported by Lukacs's brother-in-law. 2008 WL 4067335, at *8 (emphasis added). These scenarios, based on pure speculation, do not constitute findings by a preponderance of the evidence that what “could have” happened, actually did happen.

Moreover, although Bakalar now claims that there is no “direct evidence that all of the Schiele art sold by Lukacs had once belonged to Fritz Grunbaum,” or that “the Drawing belonged to Fritz Grunbaum prior to or during the war,” there is significant circumstantial evidence that this artwork had belonged to him. Indeed, the district judge decided the case on this premise, and it was supported by the deposition testimony of Eberhard Kornfeld, a partner at Galerie Gutekunst, and the trial testimony of Jane Kallir, the current director of the Galerie St. Etienne. Significantly, the Sotheby's Catalogue Description for the Drawing, February 8, 2005, which it prepared on Bakalar's behalf, listed the provenance as follows:

Fritz Grunbaum, Vienna (until 1941)

Elisabeth Grunbaum-Herzl, Vienna (widow of the above; until 1942; thence by decent)

Mathilde Lukcas-Herzl (sister of the above)

Gutekunst & Klipstein, Bern (on consignment from the above by 1956)

Galerie St. Etienne, New York

Norman Granz, New York

Galerie St. Etienne, New York

Acquired from the above by the present owner

(A-700.)

The admission by Sotheby's as to the initial provenance of the Drawing was confirmed by the judicial admission regarding its provenance in Bakalar's original complaint. See Official Comm. of the Unsecured Creditors of Color Tile, Inc. v. Coopers & Lybrand, LLP, 322 F.3d 147, 167 (2d Cir.2003). Specifically, Bakalar alleged in his complaint that:

The Drawing has an established and documented provenance. It originally belonged to the collection Fritz Grunbaum, a well-known Vienesse cabaret performer. In 1938, the Nazis confiscated Grunbaum's residence and inventoried the contents of his art collection. Grunbaum was deported to Dachau, where he died in 1941. His wife, Elisabeth, died the following year. By all credible accounts, however, the Grunbaum art collection escaped confiscation by the Nazis, and the collection, including the Drawing, subsequently came in to the possession of Grunbaum's sister-in-law, Mathilde Lukacs-Herzl, after the war.

*152 (A-217.) On the eve of trial, Bakalar moved to file an amended complaint, deleting his admission as to the initial provenance of the Drawing, because it was based on information he obtained from Kornfeld, who had come to this conclusion in 1998 after he learned of Fritz Grunbaum's relationship to Lukacs-Herzl. While Bakalar was apparently permitted to file an amended complaint, Kornfeld and Kallir had sufficient expertise in the field to provide competent evidence on this score. Nor is it any answer to argue, as Bakalar does here, that their opinion was based on circumstantial rather than direct evidence. Moreover, notwithstanding the amended complaint, Bakalar's admission as to the provenance of the Drawing constitutes competent evidence that the trier of fact is free to consider, along with Bakalar's explanation for its inclusion in the original complaint.

In sum, my reading of the record suggests that there is substantial evidence to support the claim of the Grunbaum heirs that the Drawing was owned by Grunbaum and he was divested of possession and title against his will.

***

As set forth above, both Swiss art dealer Eberhard Kornfeld and art dealer Jane Kallir swore that each of the Egon Schieles sold in a 1956 sale in Berne, Switzerland at the Gutekunst & Klipstein gallery (now Galerie Kornfeld), belonged to Fritz Grunbaum when he was deported to Dachau and murdered.   Right now Austria is engaging in Holocaust denial by refusing to restitute these stolen artworks to the heirs of Fritz Grunbaum.  The story of a Grunbaum family member selling the works in Switzerland is a complete fabrication.  But even if true, as Judge Korman correctly points out, artworks stolen stolen from a concentration camp victim remain stolen even if a family member later stole it back from Nazis (this is the actual nutty Austrian theory).

The actual Nazi records show that they robbed everything from the Grunbaums.  The Jewish Property Declarations have stamps that say "Gesperrt" and "Erledigt" which indicate that the art collection and other property had been liquidated for the Reich by 1939.

How can Austria continue to deny the Holocaust in the face of such clear evidence?

For more information on the life and art collection of Fritz Grunbaum, please visit https://artstolenfromfritzgrunbaum.wordpress.com/

www.dunnington.com
 Copyright law, fine art and navigating the courts. All practice, no theory.Copyright Litigation Handbook (Thomson Reuters Westlaw 2014-2015) by Raymond J. Dowd
 

From Murder to Museums: Recent Cases and Ethical Considerations in Nazi Looted Art

Museums have recently been criticized by the Jewish Claims Conference in a report here for ethical lapses: promising to, yet failing to research their collections and to coordinate and promote research into the provenance of their collections.  The report conclude that Nazi looted art in museum collections has still not been identified or researched, much less returned.   Are museums are simply waiting for the last Holocaust victims to die before publishing research on their collections?  ISIS finances itself by looting antiquities.  How can we stop museums from creating a market for these spoils?

If you care about the history and future of American museums, I hope that you will please join Judge Barbara Jaffe and me for this wonderful event at New York County Lawyers' Association on June 16.

For more information and to register:  http://www.nycla.org/index.cfm?section=CLE&page=CLE_Detail&itemID=4082&dateID=20150616

Location: New York County Lawyers' Association 2nd Floor Auditorium, 14 Vesey Street Tuesday, June 16, 2015, 6:00 PM - 7:40 PM Member Price:     $50 Non-Member Attorney Price:     $75 Course ID: C061615 Credits: 2 NJ Credits: 1 Ethics; 1 General 2 NY Credits: 1 Ethics; 1 PP; Transitional and Non-transitional Course Description: While much attention has been given to the resolution of the case surrounding the Woman in Gold portrait, learn the facts and ethical considerations behind the current pending controversies regarding artworks looted by Nazi Germany, including Camille Pissarro’s “Shepherdess Bringing in Sheep,” currently residing at the Fred Jones Jr. Museum of Art in Norman, Oklahoma and Egon Schiele’s “Girl With Black Hair,” currently at Oberlin College. This fascinating discussion will look at the law, the history and the ethical considerations involved in the still unfolding cases resulting from the unfinished business of World War II. Faculty: Faculty: Raymond Dowd, Dunnington Bartholow & Miller LLP; Hon. Barbara Jaffe, Acting Justice, Supreme Court, 1st Judicial District, New York, NY

www.dunnington.com
 Copyright law, fine art and navigating the courts. All practice, no theory.Copyright Litigation Handbook (Thomson Reuters Westlaw 2014-2015) by Raymond J. Dowd
 

Art Law: From Murder To Museums - Recent Nazi Looted Art Cases - May 14 2015

Girl With Black Hair by Egon Schiele - Stolen From Fritz Grunbaum

(currently at Oberlin College)

THE NEW ROCHELLE BAR ASSOCIATION

Invites Members to attend a FREE 2 Credit CLE Course

FROM MURDER TO MUSEUMS: Recent Nazi Looted Art Cases

With Speakers:

Hon. Barbara Jaffe
Acting Justice, Supreme Court, 1st Judicial District, New York, NY
Raymond J. Dowd, Esq.
Partner-Dunnington Bartholow & Miller LLP, New York, NY


This free course, which includes lite dinner, is offered ONLY to our current members and is sponsored by NEW ROCHELLE BAR ASSOCIATION

WHERE: Monroe College, GADDY HALL, 380 Main Street, New Rochelle, N.Y.
WHEN: Thursday, May 14, 2015, Registration and Lite Dinner at 5:30 pm; CLE 6 – 8 pm

This 2-credit SKILLS CLE Course is approved as Transitional and Non-Transitional (appropriate for both newly admitted and experienced attorneys).  The NEW ROCHELLE BAR ASSOCIATION is certified by the New York State Continuing Legal Education Board as an Accredited Provider of Continuing Legal Education in the State of New York

EMAIL YOUR RESPONSE to Jeffrey L. Levin, Esq., at jeffrey.levin.law@gmail.com

PLEASE NOTE: SEATING IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO THE FIRST 75 REGISTRANTS.

[NOTE! We will send a confirmation of registration by return email.
  If you do not receive a confirmation you are not registered and will not be admitted.]

NOTE: You will not be admitted if you arrive 10 minutes or more after the program begins.
Also, if you enroll for a CLE class and are unable to attend, please call Jeff Levin, Esq. at 725-3468 at least 24 hours in advance so that members who may have been placed on a waiting list can be registered.  If you enroll but fail to timely cancel for more than one CLE class, you may be precluded from attending future CLEs.

For more information on Nazi art looting, check out Can A Jewish Man Imprisoned In The Dachau Concentration Camp Transfer Good Title To A Schiele Painting?

www.dunnington.com
 Copyright law, fine art and navigating the courts. All practice, no theory.
Copyright Litigation Handbook (Thomson Reuters Westlaw 2014-2015) by Raymond J. Dowd
 

The Second Circuit, Nazi Looted Art, and Why Museums Are Letting ISIS Flourish

Camille Pissaro - La Bergere Rentrant des Moutons

The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has remanded a case against the University of Oklahoma brought by a Jewish woman seeking the return of a painting by Camille Pissaro that had been stolen by the Nazis from her father.

This case is one of a wave in the United States where museums have asserted statutes of limitations to hold artwork that the museums know to be stolen from Jewish families.  This violates an international agreement that the United States signed in 1998 known as the Washington Conference Principles on Nazi-Confiscated Art.

I discuss why museum directors who launder stolen art, rather than return it to the families from whom it was stolen should be prosecuted and jailed in a law review article Nazi Looted Art and Cocaine:  When Museum Directors Take It, Call The Cops.

If you are interested in the topic, please check out this 2014 report by the Jewish Claims Conference:  Art and Judaica Looted by Nazis from Jews Still Largely Unidentified; Review of 50 Countries Shows Little Progress Despite International Pacts   It blasts museums for failing to follow their own ethics codes.

U.S. museums are the ultimate repository for billions in stolen art, meaning that the U.S. taxpayer finances looting operations, past and present.  To understand how ISIS finances its operations through looted antiquities, I recommend Col Matthew Bogdanos' lectures and his book The Thieves of Baghdad: One Marine's Passion For Ancient Civilizations and the Journey To Recover The World's Greatest Stolen Treasures.   The Colonel and I recently spoke at the National Arts Club where he described the role of museums and auction houses in laundering antiquities.

When will prosecutors have the courage to take on The American Alliance of Museums?  The National Stolen Property Act has long forbid the transport, possession and concealment of stolen property (as does the law of every state), but prosecutors don't have the gumption to take on rich, powerful and popular museums.  The result is that tax breaks are given out for donations of stolen property.  The U.S. taxpayer is the victim, our museums have been transformed into laundering institutions, and we wonder why organizations like ISIS continue to flourish,.  Prosecutors too dumb to follow the money or too interested in taking easy cases that won't offend anyone wealthy.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/258811543/Second-Circuit-Meyer-v-University-of-Oklahoma-Art-Law#fullscreen=1  www.dunnington.com
 Copyright law, fine art and navigating the courts. All practice, no theory.Copyright Litigation Handbook (Thomson Reuters Westlaw 2014-2015) by Raymond J. Dowd
 

Dunnington Partner Raymond J. Dowd to Speak on Stolen Art at ABA Annual Meeting in Boston on August 8, 2014

Dunnington Partner Raymond J. Dowd to Speak on Stolen Art at ABA Annual Meeting in Boston on August 8, 2014

 

            Raymond J. Dowd, a partner in the New York law firm Dunnington, Bartholow & Miller LLP, will join a panel of museum and legal experts to discuss:  “Stolen Art: Who Owns the Art Hanging on the Wall?”  The panel, to be held on August 8, 2014 at 8:30 a.m., is part of  IPCENTRAL, a program organized by the American Bar Association Section of Intellectual Property Law from August 7-10 at the Boston Marriott Copley Place Hotel.

            IPCENTRAL is a two-day gathering of the world’s leading IP professionals. Topics of discussion range from the impact of the America Invents Act on patent challenges to the portrayal of IP law in pop culture to recent Supreme Court decisions on patent cases.  Mr. Dowd and his fellow panelists will discuss recent technological and case law developments affecting the traffic in stolen art, including heightened legal and reputational risks now faced by museums and galleries, provenance policies required to ensure proper chain of title to art collections, and increased efforts to facilitate the return of art stolen during World War II.  Mr. Dowd will discuss his success before the New York Court of Appeals in obtaining the return to the Pergamon Museum in Berlin, Germany of an ancient Assyrian tablet excavated from the Temple of Ishtar. For the full IPCENTRAL program brochure please click here.

            Mr. Dowd’s practice focuses on litigation in federal and state trial and appellate courts, as well as arbitration and mediation.  Mr. Dowd is the author of Copyright Litigation Handbook (West 7th Ed. 2013-2014)(updated annually).  Mr. Dowd has handled cases involving art law, copyrights, trademarks, cybersquatting, privacy, trusts and decedents’ estates, licensing, corporate and real estate property.  Mr. Dowd lectures frequently on copyright and art law at events and locations around the world, including the 2009 Prague Conference on Holocaust-Era Assets, the Jewish Museum in Berlin, Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, the National Arts Club, the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts, the San Francisco War Memorial, and the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

            Mr. Dowd currently serves on the Board of Directors of the Federal Bar Association, having served as General Counsel (2011-2012) and as President of the Southern District of New York Chapter (2006-2008).  In 2007, he co-founded the Art Litigation and Dispute Resolution Institute at New York County Lawyers’ Association.

            Dunnington, Bartholow & Miller LLP was selected as a 2014 Top Ranked Law Firm for Intellectual Property by Corporate Counsel/ALM/The American Lawyer.  Dunnington is a full-service law firm providing corporate, litigation, intellectual property, real estate, taxation and estate planning services for an international clientele.  Find out more at www.dunnington.com.

George Grosz: Cultural Enemy Number One of Hitler and the MoMA - Tomorrow Night National Arts Club!

National Arts Club - 15 Gramercy Park South NYC




Wednesday, April 30, 8:00 PM
a Roundtable / Young Members event

George Grosz, Cultural Enemy Number One of the Nazis: A Legacy in Art and Law

---

George Grosz was tried twice in Germany for his art, once for blasphemy (for his work “Shut Your Mouth and Keep On Serving”) and once for slandering the Prussian military (for his work “Fit for Active Service”). Declared Cultural Enemy Number One by the Nazis, Grosz was physically attacked, and escaped Germany in January 1933, just before Adolf Hitler burned the Reichstag and seized power. Prior to his escape, many of Grosz’s satirical works were banned, ordered to be destroyed, or both. From 1933 to the early 1950s, Grosz taught painting in New York City, primarily at the Art Students League. Grosz rejected abstract expressionism, making him a cultural enemy of the Museum of Modern Art.
   Decades later, from 2003 to 2011, litigation reaching the U.S. Supreme Court mapped out the tortured cultural legacy he left behind, and shook the underpinnings of the MoMA. Although Grosz, who fought for Germany in World War I, was originally associated with Dadaism, his artwork is now commonly referred to as part of the New Objectivity movement, a post-war movement in which veterans of World War I communicated the horror, destruction, and trauma of war.
   Art attorneys Ray Dowd, David Rowland, and Pati Hertling will engage in a discussion about Grosz and his legacy in law and art. NAC Governor Sam Madden will moderate; a Q&A session will follow the discussion.

More information on the National Arts Club website http://www.nationalartsclub.org/Default.aspx?p=DynamicModule&pageid=337091&ssid=235591&vnf=1






www.dunnington.com
 Copyright law, fine art and navigating the courts. All practice, no theory.Copyright Litigation Handbook (Thomson Reuters Westlaw 2012-2013) by Raymond J. Dowd
 

Art Law - Stolen Art & Litigating Holocaust-Era Expropriation Claims Panel Featuring Chief Judge Alex Kozinski

Click here to register online!

www.dunnington.com
 Copyright law, fine art and navigating the courts. All practice, no theory.Copyright Litigation Handbook (Thomson Reuters Westlaw 2012-2013) by Raymond J. Dowd
 

Art Law: Join Me At The Fifth International Conference on Nazi Looted Art October 8-9, 2013

The 5th International Conference on Nazi Looted Art

October 8-9, 2013

Podebrady, Czech Republic

"The West" Versus "The East" Or United Europe?

I have been kindly invited by the Czech government to speak on an panel regarding legal obstacles to the recovery of Nazi-looted art in the United States.  I spoke on an expert panel in 2009 at the Prague Conference on Holocaust-era assets, I have been invited back for the Fifth Anniversary of the Prague Conference. The conference features experts from around the work from museums, archives, not-for-profits and governments who are struggling with issues related to provenance research, archives, and the problem of recovering artworks looted during the reign of Nazi terror.   The conference promises to explore different conceptions of provenance research, documentation and identification of looted cultural assets and the possibilities of the international cooperation in Europe and in the world.  I hope to see you there!

   http://www.scribd.com/doc/152775241"  style="text-decoration: underline;" >Conference Schedule

 For the full brochure online, please click here!

www.dunnington.com
 Copyright law, fine art and navigating the courts. All practice, no theory.Copyright Litigation Handbook (Thomson Reuters Westlaw 2012-2013) by Raymond J. Dowd
 

ART LAW: STOLEN ART & LITIGATING HOLOCAUST-ERA EXPROPRIATION CLAIMS - Los Angeles September 11, 2013

I will be speaking at a panel sponsored by the Federal Bar Association in Los Angeles at Latham & Watkins.

Time: 5:30 p.mRegistration: 5:00 p.m.
A moderated panel discussion featuring leading authorities discussing claims to Nazi-looted artworks; the legal and practical obstacles facing claimants of property stolen by the Nazis; and the moral and other issues confronting institutions possessing property against which claims have been made.
Location: Latham & Watkins
355 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90071-1560
Cost: Cost: FBA Members $60 - FBA Non-Members $70
Government Employees: $40
FBA Member Group of 10 $500
Federal Judiciary and one guest - Complimentary
Federal Judiciary - Additional Guests $25
(Parking Included)

For full flyer: StolenArtPanelFlyer.pdf

www.dunnington.com
 Copyright law, fine art and navigating the courts. All practice, no theory.Copyright Litigation Handbook (Thomson Reuters Westlaw 2012-2013) by Raymond J. Dowd
 

Art Law - DePaul Article: It's OK for US Museums To Sue Jews Over Artworks Stolen During the Holocaust

I was provided with an article from Volume XXIII of the DePaul Journal of Art, Technology and Intellectual Property Law (2013) at page 279.   The article is written by Simon Frankel, a partner of Covington & Burling who was counsel to the Museum of Fine Arts Boston and his associate Ethan Forrest.  The article argues that it is ok for museums to sue Jews make sure that their rights to reclaim stolen artworks in museum collections are cut off.

I provide a contrary viewpoint in my recently-published article Nazi Looted Art and Cocaine: When Museum Directors Take It, Call The Cops.

I think that any museum directors who are suing Jews and asserting statutes of limitations and laches to avoid scrutiny of stolen artworks in their collections ought to be put in jail, particularly since taxpayers finance the cost of each acquisition of stolen art.  When Leonard Lauder announces a murky "billion dollar gift" what he means is that he won't pay a billion in taxes and will dump a lot of art that he bought in Switzerland on the cheap and potentially can't sell on the market on unsuspecting taxpayers and that years from now we run the risk of museum directors crying about how they can't figure out where the artworks came from and that when Jewish families invoke Holocaust-era claims, the museums can hire expensive lawyers to deny that the Holocaust ever happened, much as museums are now doing.  A billion dollar loss to New York City taxpayers means fewer schools, crappier roads, and that another billionaire gets a free ride for offloading potential junk in his portfolio.

We need to stop museums from accepting junk provenances: those that are not published and based on readily-available documents and that can be subjected to peer review, as the ethics codes of professional historians require.  The culture of museum secrecy and obfuscation has to end.

Lootedart.com has given my article top billing here.

Center for Art Law calls it an article with "a cheeky title and noble purpose" in a post titled "Attorney's Appeal for Intervention Against Museums Addicted to Nazi Looted Art" here

Jasper Jottings focus on my attack on museums enabling tax cheats here

Sullivan & Worcester's Art Law Report called my arguments "compelling" and the article "noteworthy" pointing out that it raises arguments that museums cannot easily answer here

www.dunnington.com
 Copyright law, fine art and navigating the courts. All practice, no theory.
Copyright Litigation Handbook (Thomson Reuters Westlaw 2012-2013) by Raymond J. Dowd 

Art Law: Masterpieces and Mystery - Nazi Art Looting Presentation at Dayton Art Institute May 21

For those interested in art law and are in the vicinity of Dayton, Ohio, I hope that you will consider coming to my program sponsored by the Federal Bar Association and the Dayton Bar Association at the Dayton Art Institute on May 21, more information here.

For a great video introduction of the program on Dayton television by Michael Roediger, Executive Director of the Dayton Art Institute, check out the video below.

Mysteries of the Holocaust

For my recent article in Rutgers Journal of Law and Religion titled:  Nazi Looted Art: When Museum Directors Take It, Call the Cops, check out my last post here.


www.dunnington.com
 Copyright law, fine art and navigating the courts. All practice, no theory.
Copyright Litigation Handbook (Thomson Reuters Westlaw 2012-2013) by Raymond J. Dowd 

Nazi Looted Art and Cocaine: When Museum Directors Take It, It Call the Cops

 

Egon Schiele's Girl with Black Hair - Stolen From Fritz Grunbaum When He Was In the Dachau Concentration Camp, now at the Allen Art Museum at Oberlin College

The Rutgers Journal of Law and Religion, as part of their Nuremberg volume, just published my article:  Nazi Looted Art and Cocaine: When Museum Directors Take It, Call the Cops.  Check out Volume 14 here.

The article argues that the U.S. government clearly condemned the theft of artworks from victims of Nazism and that federal and state statutes have consistently forbidden the traffic and concealment of stolen property.  As such, Nazi looted art should be treated as a contraband substance, like cocaine, and should be returned to its true owners under the common law precept that no one can take good title from a thief.   The article further argues that federal courts have misconstrued state statutes of limitations and principles of equity to permit museums and private collectors to inappropriately launder title to stolen artworks.  The article arguest that it is time for prosecutors to act and that the National Stolen Property Act gives them a weapon to do so.  They have the weapons and evidence, only the political courage to confront powerful museums with the evidence is lacking.  The article argues that museums, colleges and individuals who use technical defenses to keep stolen property as the Toledo Museum of Fine Art, the Detroit Institute of the Arts, the Museum of Fine Arts Boston, the MoMA and the Guggenheim have done bring only disgrace upon themselves and don't clean title to the stolen goods.   The article further argues that this is not a victimless crime because the wealthy donors who have "donated" the stolen artworks to museums got a tax break for the "fair market value" of the artworks.  Accordingly these tax cheats, with the complicity of inattentive museum trustees, have stolen from their fellow taxpayers and have unfairly saddled publicly-supported institutions with costly problems.

www.dunnington.com
 Copyright law, fine art and navigating the courts. All practice, no theory.
Copyright Litigation Handbook (Thomson Reuters Westlaw 2012-2013) by Raymond J. Dowd 

Art Law: Stolen Art Panel Tomorrow Night At Fordham Law

The Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal and the Fordham Art Law Society Present:

Defining Cultural Ownership: Shifting Focus, Shifting Norms

In this panel discussion, attorneys whose practices focus on art law will speak on issues of repatriation and restitution -- specifically, how the legal process of returning looted works of art to their countries of origin is informed by the works' genre and surrounding cultural norms. The discussion will follow the legal system's treatment of looted art from various eras, including Antiquity, the Second World War, and the more recent Cuban Revolution.

Agenda:

7:30 - 7:45
Registration

7:45 - 7:55
Welcome remarks & introduction

7:55 - 8:10
Evan Barr, Partner, Steptoe & Johnson LLP

8:10 - 8:25
Raymond Dowd, Partner, Dunnington Bartholow & Miller LLP

8:25 - 8:40
Mari-Claudia Jimenez, Associate, Herrick Feinstein LLP

8:40 - 9:10
Moderated Q&A

Moderator:
Leila Amineddoleh
Of Counsel and Chair of the Art Law Group, Lombard & Geliebter LLP; Executive Director of the Lawyers' Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation; and Adjunct Professor, Fordham University School of Law

Registration:

This program is free and open to the public

CLE Credits: 1.5 Non-transitional & transitional, Professional Practice NYS CLE Credits are available for $50 ($35 for Fordham Law alumni and public interest attorneys)

CLICK HERE TO REGISTER!


www.dunnington.com
 Copyright law, fine art and navigating the courts. All practice, no theory.
Copyright Litigation Handbook (Thomson Reuters Westlaw 2012-2013) by Raymond J. Dowd 

Will US Supreme Court Hear Nazi Art Looting Case?

Egon Schiele's Seated Woman with Bent Left Leg (Torso) 1917

A petition was docketed this Monday asking the US Supreme Court to review a case where state law was used to grant title to a stolen artwork to a US purchaser.    A PDF of the petition for certiorari can be accessed below.  This is an important opportunity for the US Supreme Court to review the issue of Nazi-looted art in the United States, an issue that has created disarray in our federal courts and has pitted state law against such federal laws as the National Stolen Property Act 18 USC 2314.

My firm represents the petitioner and I am counsel of record.  This was the first Nazi-era art looting case ever to be tried in a U.S. federal court.

Vavra v Bakalar Cert Petition - Nazi Looted Art At US Supreme Court

www.dunnington.com
 Copyright law, fine art and navigating the courts. All practice, no theory.
Copyright Litigation Handbook (Thomson Reuters Westlaw 2012-2013) by Raymond J. Dowd 

Nazi Art Looting: Egon Schiele, George Grosz and Stolen Art in U.S. Museums

The Roundtable Presents
Nazi Art Looting: Egon Schiele, George Grosz and Stolen Art in U.S. Museums

Tuesday, March 12, 8:00 PM Illustrated Lecture

National Arts Club
15 Gramercy Park South
New York, NY 10003

Ray Dowd returns to the NAC, this time to take us on an astonishing visual tour of the latest Nazi looting cases to hit the art world. He queries whether U.S. museums and collectors have betrayed the Allied victory in World War II by holding on to works belonging to persecuted Jewish families. Will the U.S. Supreme Court deal with the issue? A pre-eminent litigator in federal and state courts, Dowd has lectured at venues such as the Jewish Museum in Berlin, Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, the 2009 Holocaust-Era Assets Conference in Prague, and most recently at the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts. He is a partner in the law firm of Dunnington Bartholow & Miller LLP in NYC and is a national officer of the Federal Bar Association. You’ve read about his cases in The New York Times and ArtNews, now get the story first hand.


For further information please contact the National Arts Club at (212) 475-3424

www.dunnington.com
 Copyright law, fine art and navigating the courts. All practice, no theory.
Copyright Litigation Handbook (Thomson Reuters Westlaw 2012-2013) by Raymond J. Dowd 

Nazi Art Looting - Recent Case Law - Audio From Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts

Last Thursday I spoke on Nazi art looting at an event hosted by the Brandeis Law Society and the Federal Bar Association at the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts.   The event was well-attended despite bitterly cold weather with 75 attendees.  The Hon. Sandra M. Moss introduced the program and Frank McGovern, President of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Chapter introduced me.  Thanks to the hosts for the wonderful hospitality.

The audio program is available now on the Federal Bar Association website here, together with a PDF of my powerpoint, so that you can follow along and get the visuals. 

www.dunnington.com
 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2011 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here  

Jan 24 Masterpieces & Mystery: Recovering Art Stolen From Victims of the Holocaust

I hope that you will be able to join us at this wonderful venue in Philadelphia on Thursday, January 24.  Special thanks to the Brandeis Law Society, the EDPA Chapter of the Federal Bar Association, the EDPA Chapter of the Federal Bar Association, Judge Sandra Moss, Samantha Zipkin, Frank McGovern and Gregg Kanter for making it all happen.  Click here to register.


www.dunnington.com
 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2011 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here  

Stolen Art: Litigating Holocaust-Era Expropriation Claims

 

The Federal Bar Association, Northern District of California Chapter andThe Federal Bar Association Intellectual Property Section
Invite you to an evening of scholarship and socializing

Stolen Art: Litigating Holocaust-Era Expropriation Claims

By Raymond J. Dowd

October 22, 2012 6:00 pm – 9:00 pm 

The Green Room, San Francisco War Memorial Peforming Arts Center

401 Van Ness Avenue, San Francisco

Mr. Dowd’s presentation will be followed by a wine and hors d’oeuvres reception

Price per person:       45 FBA Members       $55 Non-Members       1 Hour MCLE

The program will be appreciated by those with an interest in history, art or law,

so invite your friends and colleagues.

Please contact Bernadette Dunne for further information

Please RSVP using the attached form by October 17

Stolen Art: Litigating Holocaust-Era

Expropriation Claims

RSVP FORM

Please respond by Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Fill out this form and mail it with your check made payable to “Federal Bar Association, Northern District California Chapter” to:

Bernadette Dunne
Owen, Wickersham & Erickson, P.C.
455 Market Street, Suite 1910
San Francisco, CA 94105
Please also send an email to bdunne@owe.com confirming your attendance and the number of your party.
Cost to attend is $45 per person for FBA members and $55 per person for non-members.
Name ________________________________
Total number in your party _________________

FBA Members ____ Non-Members ____

Address _______________________________

City ___________________________ State__________ Zip __________

Telephone __________________ Email ___________________

Check Total: _____________

www.dunnington.com
 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2011 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here