-
Le Grand Pont – Weinmann Heirs and Yale University Art Gallery
-
The painting “Le Grand Pont”, by Gustave Courbet, was owned by Josephine Weinmann and her family, but after they were forced to flee Germany from Nazi persecution, the painting was purchased by Herbert Schaefer, a Nazi militant. When Schaefer later loaned the painting to the Yale University Art Gallery, Weinmann’s heirs sued for its return.
Located in
All Cases
-
Hopi Masks – Hopi Tribe v. Néret-Minet and Estimations & Ventes aux Enchères
-
Between 2013 and 2014, dozens of Hopi’s sacred objects were sold at auctions in Paris despite strong protests and legal actions launched by the Hopi tribe. These actions were unsuccessful because French judicial authorities denied legal standing to the Hopis and considered that the sales did not violate French law.
Located in
All Cases
-
Ka Nefer Nefer Mask – United States v. Mask of Ka Nefer Nefer
-
On July 28, 2014, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals denied the request of the United States Government to take further legal action regarding the St. Louis Art Museum’s ownership of the 3200 year old Egyptian Ka Nefer Nefer funerary mask.
Located in
All Cases
-
The Night Café Painting – Morozov Heirs v. Yale University
-
In 1908, Ivan Morozov, a Russian art collector, purchased Van Gogh’s painting “The Night Café”. The 1917 Bolshevik Revolution led to the nationalization of private property, and as such Morozov’s art collection was confiscated and subsequently sold.
Located in
All Cases
-
Schiele Drawing – Grunbaum Heirs v. David Bakalar
-
In 1938, the Nazi expropriated the art collection of Fritz Grunbaum while he was detained in Dachau concentration camp. In 1963, David Bakalar purchased a Schiele drawing that had belonged to the Grunbaum family from a gallery in Bern.
Located in
All Cases
-
Three Grosz Paintings – Grosz Heirs v. Museum of Modern Art
-
In April of 2009, after a decade-long search for artworks lost during Nazi persecution, George Grosz’s legal heirs brought action against the Museum of Modern Art, seeking declaration of title and replevin as to three of the artist’s paintings in the Museum’s possession, and requesting damages for their unlawful conversion. Holding that the action was time-barred by the statute of limitations, the District Court granted the museum’s motion to dismiss. The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York affirmed the order on appeal, and the United States Supreme Court denied the Heirs’ writ of certiorari.
Located in
All Cases
-
Chagall Gouache – Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation and Lubell
-
In 1993, the Guggenheim Foundation, Mrs. Rachel Lubell, and other interested parties reached a settlement regarding a Marc Chagall painting that had been stolen from the Museum and purchased by Mrs. Lubell almost thirty years prior. Though a trial court had originally held the Guggenheim’s suit seeking recovery was time-barred, the Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s decision and clarified New York’s “demand and refusal” rule. On remand, the parties settled just one day after the new trial began.
Located in
All Cases
-
14 Archaeological Objects – Italy and Cleveland Museum of Art
-
On 19 November 2008, the Italian Ministry for Cultural Assets and Activities and the Cleveland Museum of Art signed an agreement concerning 14 archaeological objects in the museum’s collection. This agreement provides for the return to Italy of the artworks in exchange for loans of “a similar number of works of equal aesthetic and historical significance”.
Located in
All Cases
-
Victorious Youth – Italy v. J. Paul Getty Museum
-
The “Victorious Youth” – a life-size bronze statue created sometime between the 4th and 2nd century BC – is at the centre of an ongoing dispute between Italy and the J. Paul Getty Museum. This statue was discovered in 1964, caught up in the nets of a fishing boat working out of the port of Fano on the Adriatic coast of Italy.
Located in
All Cases
-
Stèles historiques – Galerie d’art c. Italie
-
En 1980, des stèles historiques sont remises par la Suisse à l’Italie dans le cadre d’une procédure pénale ouverte en Italie. Une Galerie d’art suisse introduit une action en Suisse pour récupérer les stèles historiques. L’Italie se prévaut de son immunité de juridiction.
Located in
All Cases