Alfred Flechtheim Scandal at Museum of Modern Art - MoMA - Continues

I reported previously that the MoMA published a catalog called German Expressionism:The Graphic Impulse by Starr Figura that COMPLETELY eliminated mention of Alfred Flechtheim.

Image of Rudolph Belling's sculpture Portrait of Alfred Flechtheim (1927)

More on Alfred Flechtheim and MoMA's attempts to write him out of art history hereand here

MoMA has perpetrated the fiction that Alfred Flechtheim's gallery was not Aryanized in 1933 because MoMA wishes to shield its collection, particularly the items that were stolen from Alfred Flechtheim, from public scrutiny.   More information on the Nazi taking of Flechtheim's inventory here.

MoMA's website does not even show an image of Belling's Portrait of Alfred Flechtheim, and the MoMA has never told the story of Flechtheim's role as a Nazi persecutee story here.
But after the scandal of publishing the German Expressionism catalog that pretends Flechtheim does not exist, MoMA's website now shows 28 works that it claims were published by Alfred Flechtheim:

That's just completely ridiculous, MoMA's collection has many more works from Flechtheim's 1933 inventory.   As I argued here the provenance of Paul Klee's Pastorale shows that it was likely taken by the Nazi Alexander Voemel from Flechtheim in 1933.

Pastorale (Rhythms) (1927)
Paul Klee (German, born Switzerland. 1879-1940)

1927. Tempera on canvas mounted on wood, 27 1/4 x 20 5/8" (69.3 x 52.4 cm). Abby Aldrich Rockefeller Fund and exchange

Collection work meeting criteria specified in Introduction.

157.1945

Rudolf Probst (Galerie Neue Kunst Fides; Das Kunsthaus), Dresden/Mannheim. Until 1928

Galerie Alfred Flechtheim, Berlin and Düsseldorf, then in London. 1928 – at least 1930 [likely until Flechthem’s death, in March 1937]

(J. B. Neumann (Jsrael Ber Neumann), New York. 1930. Agent for Flechtheim)

(Alex Vömel, Dusseldorf. Former Flechtheim Gallery, became Alex Vömel Gallery from March 1933. [Likely on consignement from Flechtheim, 1933 – 1934])

James Mayor Gallery, London. [Brought to London by Flechtheim when he started to work for the Mayor Gallery, c. 1934.] 1934 – 1935

For sale during Paul Klee exhibition at Kunsthalle Basel, 1935

(Paul Klee, Bern. Returned to him from above exhibition, unsold, 1935)

[Likely returned by Klee to Flechtheim in London]

Daniel-Henry Kahnweiler, Paris. [Likely acquired/on consignment from Flechtheim] by 1937 - by 1939

Mrs. Stanley B. Resor, New York. By 1941

Nierendorf Gallery (Karl Nierendorf), New York (New York gallery opened in 1937). Acquired from Stanley B. Resor, by 1945

The Museum of Modern Art, New York. Acquired from Nierendorf through Abby Aldrich Rockefeller Fund and exchange, 1945

And astonishingly, after publishing a catalogue for a 2011 German Expressionism exhibition that pretends Flechtheim did not exist, MoMA's website now has the following:
Alfred Flechtheim

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Starr Figura, German Expressionism: The Graphic Impulse, New York, The Museum of Modern Art, 2011

Alfred Flechtheim opened his gallery in 1913, with sponsorship from Paul Cassirer. Became known as the leading dealer in Germany for modern French art, much of it obtained through his friend Daniel-Henry Kahnweiler, the eminent Parisian gallerist and German émigré. Despite his ambivalence toward contemporary German art, eventually also exhibited a select number of Expressionist, Bauhaus, and Neue Sachlichkeit (New Objectivity) artists, including Ernst Barlach, Max Beckmann, George Grosz (under contract from 1925 to 1931), Paul Klee (whom he represented from 1927 to 1933), Oskar Kokoschka, Wilhelm Lehmbruck, and August Macke. Published prints by Grosz, Else Lasker-Schüler, Ludwig Meidner, and many other now less familiar German artists. In 1921 began to issue the cosmopolitan art and culture periodical Der Querschnitt; three years later, sold it to the publishing house Propyläen. Highly successful, particularly in the postwar years, moved his primary operation to Berlin in 1921, and opened branches in Frankfurt and Cologne in 1922. A victim of Nazi anti-Semitism, was forced to emigrate in 1933, and died, impoverished, in London in 1937.

Selected Bibliography

Jentsch, Ralph. Alfred Flechtheim und George Grosz. Bonn: Weidle, 2008.

Peters, Hans Albert, and Stephan von Wiese, eds. Alfred Flechtheim, Sammler, Kunsthändler, Verleger. Exh. cat. Düsseldorf: Kunstmuseum Düsseldorf, 1987.

Iris Schmeisser

So it looks like MoMA's website is trying to make it look as if Starr Figura, the one who wrote the catalog that eliminated any mention of Flechtheim, actually did include mention of Flechtheim, but MoMA hired Iris Schmeisser to write the Website's description of Flechtheim.

Alfred Flechtheim's influence on MoMA in its first year of existence was tremendous and remains undocumented by MoMA's pseudo-art historians.  Why doesn't MoMA acknowledge its intellectual and artistic debt to Flechtheim?   And what happens to someone who writes a catalog on German Expressionism who calls Flechtheim AMBIVALENT towards German contemporary art when indeed he was perhaps one of its greatest champions?

Just look at Rudolph Belling's portrait of Alfred Flechtheim, one of which he gave to Harvard to launch what became the Busch-Reisinger collection.   Does that reflect AMBIVALENCE toward German contemporary art?   Why is Belling's sculpture featuring Flechtheim's nose not front and center in the German Expressionism exhibit?

Where the hell is Flechtheim's nose?

Flechtheim's assistant, Curt Valentin, became a Nazi agent and sold massive quantities of Nazi-looted art onto the U.S. market.   Story here

The Belling sculpture of Flechtheim was a "gift" of Curt Valentin to MoMA:

Why won't MoMA photograph and exhibit this artwork?

 http://www.dunnington.com/rdowd_bio.html
 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2010 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here  

Art Litigation: Boston Museum of Fine Arts Extorts Westfeld Heirs in Nazi Art Scandal

Rather than freely returning artworks stolen from victims of Nazi persecution, U.S. museums offer heirs less than fair market value, usually under secretive circumstances.    This type of systematic extortion has been condemned in many other countries, such as Austria, which engaged in similar practices folllowing World War II.

Below, Walter Westfeld's heir describes how the Museum of Fine Arts Boston insisted on a confidential settlement, rather than returning a stolen artwork in its possession.   Check the MFA's website here, there is no information on this transaction.

I tried to find some information on the provenance on Eglon van der Neer Portrait of a Man and a Woman In an Interior (1666).   My access to that portion of the MFA's website was blocked.

A puff piece on the MFA's purported provenance research here.  The MFA claims that it prepares reports by a woman named Victoria Reed, but none of these reports appear to be made public.  Ms. Reed is a "curator of provenance"  - which appears to be a synonym for a launderer of stolen artworks.

At issue is the role of U.S. museums in buying stolen art on an industrial level before, during and after World War II, profiting from the misery of murdered European Jews.   The role of U.S. museums in acquiring stolen art has largely been ignored by academics, with U.S. museums cloaking their actions in secrecy.   Although U.S. museums claim to engage in provenance research, little or none of this research is published, few original documents are made available, and no research is available on how much of a burden this traffic in stolen art has placed on U.S. taxpayers.



http://www.dunnington.com/rdowd_bio.html
 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2010 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here  

Art Litigation: June 30 CLE Presentation at Modern Restaurant at MoMA: How Long Do Victims of Nazi Spoliation Have To Get Their Art Back?

George Grosz' Portrait of the Poet Max-Hermann Neisse

Purchased from Charlotte Weidler through Curt Valentin

I hope that you can join me in a CLE presentation of Grosz v MoMA at the Modern Restaurant on June 30 (next Thursday) - the flyer is embedded below.

6-30-11 Emips Cle Lunch Flyer1 (3)

 http://www.dunnington.com/rdowd_bio.html
 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2010 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here  

US Supreme Court Cert Petition: U.S. Museums Betray The Holocaust Victims Redress Act of 1998

We recently filed a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of the heirs of George Grosz in Grosz v. Museum of Modern Art, accessible by the link below.    The certiorari petition describes how in federal courts around the country, museums and holders of artworks taken from Nazi persecutees have successfully advanced doctrines of constructive notice that have eviscerated the right under state law to recover stolen property that Congress thought existed when it enacted the Holocaust Victims Redress Act of 1998.   As the cert petition shows, museums told Congress that state law remedies were sufficient for victims and their heirs to recover stolen artworks.    After 1998, with Congress off their backs, museums then argued to the courts that no remedies were available under state law to those who actually tried to reclaim artworks.   Several museums even retaliated against Jewish heirs by suing them.   By filing these pre-emptive strikes, museums successfully avoided scrutiny into the question of whether or not the art was stolen.  By leaving potentially looted artworks in our museums, such "quiet title" actions have stained our national conscience.

Unfortunately, very few voices have been heard to draw attention to this tremendous crime.   Media coverage is anecdotal.  Each time stolen artworks are uncovered in museum collections, the museums feign horror and surprise, but the reality is that in the high-tax Cold War years, laundering stolen art was a major function of the U.S. museum community.  We are all now paying for those Cold-war "don't look a gift horse in the mouth" policies.   A generation of wealthy Americans dodged taxes by flipping stolen property to museums, thus passing the societal cost of their misdeeds onto the backs of U.S. taxpayers.

In turning their backs on restitution of Nazi-looted artworks after 1998, American museums have betrayed our trust and have become international scofflaws.   This is a major problem and inconsistent with the traditions of common law under which no one can take good title from a thief.   It is also inconsistent with the traditions of equity, which do not unjustly enrich those with superior knowledge, such as the museums, that should have known better than to profit from the world's worst crime.  Everyone in the art community, thanks to U.S. government warnings starting in the 1940's, knew that acquiring an artwork of European provenance that entered the country after 1932 but was created before 1946 was a "red flag".   Art historians now pretend to have no knowledge of this and instead play a game of blaming the victims and waiting until enough people die or are discouraged so that they can assert the defense of laches.   While museums throw up endless new buildings, they claim they can't even afford to figure out what stolen art is in their collections.   And by refusing to share documents and publish provenances, they ensure that no one else can figure out the stolen property trail either.

American museums, having unclean hands, should not be heard to invoke equity.  American museums, which should be taking the lead in opposing Holocaust profiteering, have instead set up impenetrable legal defenses and hide the truth behind spurious claims of privilege.   This is both morally and legally untenable.  If U.S. museums don't do the right thing and show world leadership in returning the property of Holocaust victims, no one will.

Grosz v Moma Petition of Certiorari FINAL With Appendix 5.10.11


 http://www.dunnington.com/rdowd_bio.html
 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2010 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here  

Massive German Art Forgery Scandal - The Alfred Flechtheim Collection

Among those in the know, Alfred Flechtheim is considered perhaps the greatest contemporary art dealer in Germany's Weimar Republic.   He was Jewish, chased by the Nazis from his galleries in Berlin and Dusseldorf.   A Nazi named Alexander Voemel took over his galleries in 1933.  His gallery is still operating today.   An ad for Galerie Voemel brags of its legacy:

Die Galerie Vömel, mehr als ein halbes Jahrhundert in Düsseldorf ansässig, wurde von Alex Vömel - Geschäftsführer der legendären Galerie Flechtheim - gegründet und wird heute von seinem Sohn Edwin Vömel weiter geführt.

Vor einigen Jahren ist die Galerie in das alte Stadtpalais gegenüber vom Stadtmuseum in die Karlstadt umgesiedelt.
Die Galerie Vömel führt Arbeiten der klassischen Moderne, weiterhin ist sie spezialisiert auf Skulpturen und Arbeiten auf Papier des 20. Jahrhunderts.
Gezeigt werden regelmäßig Ausstellungen, welche mit Katalogen dokumentiert werden.


Shunned by his former friends, those who stole his art conveniently wrote him out of art history.   In a book called Boston Modern, art historian Judith Bookbinder credits Alfred Flechtheim with donating a Rudolph Belling sculpture of himself as being the foundation of Harvard's collection of modern German sculpture that turned into the Busch-Reisinger collection.

Flechtheim represented artists such as Paul Cezanne, Vincent Van Gogh, Pablo Picasso, George Braque, Andre Derain,  Paul Klee, George Grosz, Wassily Kandinsky, August Macke and many others.

Flechtheim was featured on Nazi anti-semitic posters as the symbol of International Bolshevist Jewry - More on Flechtheim's nose here.

When in 1933 Nazis started attacking modern art in anti-Semitic museum exhibitions, Flechtheim and his sales to German museums were attacked.  When the 1937 Entartete Kunst exhibition took place, the Nazis had a life-sized portrait of Flechtheim.

New York's Museum of Modern Art has many works from Alfred Flechtheim's 1933 inventory, but refuses to share the provenance documentation of these artworks with researchers.

A Swiss government report on MoMA's role in the Nazi looted art trade here.

Shockingly, MoMA's current exhibition catalog German Expressionism:  The Graphic Impulse, writtten by Starr Figura and Peter Jelavich, completely omits any mention of Flechtheim.

In a bitter irony, German prosecutors just arrested a group of forgers that created fake works that they claimed were from Flechtheim's inventory.  Article from German newspaper at the link below:

 http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/europe/news/article_1641522.php/Forgers-charged-in-massive-alleged-Nazi-art-scam

Alfred Flechtheim's German-language Wikipedia page is here.  

Whether from ignorance, stupidity or venality, American museums and art historians seem to be determined to write Alfred Flechtheim out of art history.   It may be that the arrest and trial of this forgery ring in Germany will succeed in uncovering that which those Americans trafficking in and concealing Nazi-looted art would like to bury.

Not even one English-speaking Wikipedian will memorialize poor Flechtheim.

Browse my earlier posts on Alfred Flechtheim here.

A quote from Steven Litt's article  from Cleveland's Plain Dealer in 2003 below, full article here:

"Flechtheim was for the Nazi government, you can say, in art, public enemy No. 1," said Ottfried Dascher of Dortmund, a retired professor of history from the University of Bochum.

Today, Flechtheim is a hot topic in Germany, a nation trying to come to terms with its past. The art museum in Dusseldorf celebrated his life in an exhibition in 1987. His hometown of Munster renamed a street for him. And just last month, art dealers and historians, including Dascher, dedicated a plaque on the Berlin building where Flechtheim once lived.
"There is no week in which I don't get letters and e-mails from all over the world on this subject," Dascher said in a telephone interview.
One reason for the interest is that Flechtheim was part of a group of pioneering art dealers of German-Jewish heritage who were the first to champion the work of Picasso and other modern artists. Flechtheim was also part of the cultural renaissance of Weimar Germany, which brought forth the films of Fritz Lang, the music of Kurt Weill and the drama of Bertolt Brecht.


http://www.dunnington.com/rdowd_bio.html
 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2010 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here  

Art Litigation: Richard Evans on Looting Art in Wartime

Art in the Time of War | The National Interest

Historian Richard Evans' thoughtful piece on art looting in wartime. It is not surprising that one of the leading scholar of Germany in World War II would turn his attention to art.

Art Litigation: US Museums Breaching Ethics Codes By Refusing To Research and Return Nazi Looted Art

MoMA's Provenance Research Project:  A Sham?

Great essay in University of Pennsylvania's PENNumbra Guarding the Historical Record from the Nazi-Era Art Litigation Tumbling Toward The Supreme Court here.    Highly critical of the Museum of Modern Art.

A truly astonishing interview with law professor Jennifer Kreder on Illinois Public Radio here.

 http://www.dunnington.com/rdowd_bio.html
 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2010 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here  

Art Litigation: Nazi Looted Art in US Museums - Professor Jennifer Kreder Speaks Out

Great interview with law professor Jennifer Kreder on Illinois Public Radio on artworks looted by the Nazis that are now in US museums that were smuggled into the US through Switzerland.  Get the shocking story here.

 http://www.dunnington.com/rdowd_bio.html
 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2010 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here  

Declassified Swiss Government Report Shows Traffic of Nazi Looted Art To Museum of Modern Art (Updated)

Link to image in St. Louis Commerce, full article here

A declassified Swiss government report written by former Pulitzer Foundation director Laurie Stein shows that Nazi looted art passed through Switzerland to arrive at the Museum of Modern Art in New York.

As set forth in Laurie Stein's report, Curt Valentin, August Klipstein, and Karl Buchholz were key players in this traffic with Alfred Barr.   MoMA has "the highest concentration of degenerate art from Germany"..... Alfred Barr "did not shy away from buying confiscated art through American-based commercial dealers such as [Curt] Valentin."  (pp 11-12).

Hitler's Swiss Dealer - August Klipstein of Gutekunst & Klipstein, now Galerie Kornfeld

Laurie Stein just chaired a panel in Vienna on Alfred Flechtheim, one of the Weimar Republic's leading art dealers whose gallery was Aryanized by SA officer Alexander Voemel shortly after Hitler took power in 1933.   More on Alfred Flechtheim here, Picasso's Jewish Dealer here, Flechtheim's Nose here, Amicus brief in Grosz v MoMA here, Flechtheim's Portrait By Belling here, Museum directors should be prosecuted for concealing stolen art here .

American museums continue to resist inquiries into the stolen works in their collections.

For more, read below.
Stein Pyritz - Swiss Government Report



 http://www.dunnington.com/rdowd_bio.html
 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2010 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here  

Art Litigation: Alfred Flechtheim Panel in Austria To Discuss His Stolen Collection

Choyo Cactus aka "Jumping Choyo" on Dove Mountain

Below is a link to a presentation I gave in Tucson AZ on recent case developments in the federal courts on Nazi art looting.

Nazi Art Looting - Case Developments [Compatibility Mode]


Nazi art looting will be a major topic at an upcoming conference in Vienna Austria on March 23-25.  Details of the conference are here.

Austria has invited Laurie Stein to chair a presentation on Alfred Flechtheim.   

Alfred Flechtheim was a German Jewish art dealer whose art gallery was Aryanized.   Many works stolen from him are currently in museums around the world, such as the Museum of Modern Art in New York City.

Stein's report denying the Aryanization here

MoMA Expert Report Stein

The Museum of Modern Art refused to make its provenance documentaton relating to works from Alfred Flechtheim in its collection available to researchers working for the family of artist George Grosz.

More on Nazi Art Looting here.

More on Alfred Flechtheim here.

 http://www.dunnington.com/rdowd_bio.html
 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2010 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here  

Image from the Phoenix Courthouse - Federal Bar Association Presentation on Nazi Art Looting

Raymond J. Dowd, New York - U.S.M.J. Michelle Burns (District of Arizona - Phoenix) - Rob Kohn, Los Angeles 
Image under a quote from Socrates from the presentation at the Richard Meier-designed Sandra Day O'Connor U.S. Courthouse in Phoenix, Arizona.  Occasion was a presentation co-sponsored by the Phoenix Chapter of the Federal Bar Association and the Federal Bar Association's Federal Litigation Section on Recent Developments in Nazi Art Looting, view the Powerpoint here.


Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2010 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here  

Art Litigation: Nazi Art Looting #art - Recent Developments in Federal Courts

Fides Trust/Fides Treuhand Founded in 1910 - Faithfully Concealing Nazi Art Looting Transactions For the Swiss http://www.fides.ch/


Nazi Art Looting - Case Developments [Compatibility Mode]

Above is a link to a Powerpoint Presentation I gave last week to the ABA Retirement Funds at the Ritz Carleton at Dove Mountain, outside Tucson, Arizona. It is similar to a presentation I gave last month to the Federal Bar Association's Phoenix Chapter.

As the Powerpoint above shows, a wave of decisions involving Nazi art looting hit the federal circuit courts of appeal in 2010 and it looks like the traffic will continue unabated.

Very few American legal scholars have addressed the questions relevant to stolen chattels in the hands of U.S. museums and private collectors and the consequences of the museum community's failure to squarely address its misconduct in receiving stolen art following World War II and by concealing its provenance to this day.   No one has surveyed the damage to the American taxpayer as wealthy Americans shielded their income from taxation by donating stolen works to U.S. museums.

The Internal Revenue Service should investigate this racket.

As can be seen from the Powerpoint, the American Association of Museums and the American Association of Museum Directors have betrayed the Washington Conference Principles on Nazi-Confiscated Art by suing descendants of Holocaust victims and by concealing their research into the provenance of artworks in their collections.   Rather than encouraging and publishing scholarship, museums hire large and expensive law firms, then cloak all research under "attorney client privilege".    This is simply the concealment of stolen property, a state and federal crime, with museums hiring law firms to cloak their criminal actions.

More on Nazi art looting here.

Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2010 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here  

Art Litigation: Nazi Art Looting and Judicial Amnesia at DePaul Law March 9, 2011

The Center for Intellectual Property Law & Information Technology, the Center for Art, Museum & Cultural Heritage Law, the Art and Cultural Heritage Legal Society and the Center for Jewish Law & Judaic Studies
present Arts Law Colloquium Series - Jennifer Kreder
Judicial Amnesia and the Historical Record in Nazi-looted art litigation

Wednesday, March 9, 2011
11:45am – 12:45pm
DePaul University
Lewis Center - Room 805
25 E Jackson Blvd
Chicago, IL 60604

This presentation will demonstrate the wave of dismissals of claims to Nazi-looted art on technical grounds such that, with few praiseworthy exceptions, the courts of the United States no longer act as beacons of justice for the Holocaust restitution movement. In fact, they are being used by some museums to circumvent federal executive policy and distort the historical record. Tales of our most respected institutions acquiring what they knew or should have known was trafficked and laundered art likely seem outrageous and counter to common sense to those unaccustomed to hearing about the widespread infection of the market with art that had been stolen or extorted from Jews between 1933 and 1945. The truth, however, is that the modern claims are legally viable when viewed within the true historical context of the Holocaust and U.S. executive policy during the War, through the Cold War period and now.
DePaul University College of Law is an accredited Illinois MCLE provider. This program had been approved for 1 hour of CLE credit.
Please RSVP to Cecelia Story at cstory@depaul.edu.

Professor Kreder is a graduate of the Georgetown University Law Center. She has published extensively about and given many presentations in many domestic and foreign venues about legal issues affecting the international art market. With Norman Palmer, she is co-authoring the second edition of Museums and the Holocaust published by the Institute of Art and Law.
Read more (...)


 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2010 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here  

Art Litigation: Feb 17 - Nazi Looted Art in the Federal Courts - Phoenix Federal Bar Association

Nazi Looted Art in the Federal Courts - Phoenix Federal Bar Association

February 17 lunch program in Phoenix Arizona. Sponsored by the Phoenix Chapter of the Federal Bar Association.

 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2010 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here  

Nazi Art Looting: Sixth Circuit Cloaks Nazi-Era Atrocities in Sovereign Immunity

Flag of Tennessee

The United States won World War II. As part of the postwar cleanup, the US did everything in its power to undo the damage the Nazis had wrought. Nowhere was this damage more atrocious than in what the Nazis inflicted on the Jewish minority. The Jews were a non-violent, law abiding minority. Nazis expropriated and murdered them wholesale.

Some escaped. Some watched helplessly from abroad as their relatives were murdered. Such was the fate of the Westfield family. Residents of Tennessee, their relative was murdered, his assets auctioned off, the money went to finance the Nazi war machine.

In 1954, the Second Circuit, at the behest of the U.S. State Department, stripped the Nazis of sovereign immunity.

On February 2, 2011, the Nazis got sovereign immunity back in Westfield v. Federal Republic of Germany (6th Cir.).

I have posted the Westfield case below and the full text of the Second Circuit's Bernstein case.   This appears to be a circuit split over whether the Nazis were a criminal conspiracy or whether they were a legitimate government, a question that was resolved against the Nazis at Nuremberg in 1946 in the negative.

The Sixth Circuit did not cite Bernstein, nor did it cite Republic of Austria v. Altmann.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Austria_v._Altmann

The Sixth Circuit held that murdering Westfield and auctioning off his art collection (part of which is at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts), did not have a "direct effect" in the United States, even though the Nazis knew that his heirs resided in Tennessee.   Art museums in the U.S. today are actively concealing their role in laundering artworks stolen by the Nazis and battling all efforts at disclosure of Nazi-era and post War collecting practices.  U.S. museums now claim that they have a "fiduciary duty" to conceal documents and research relating to the provenance of stolen artworks in their collections and to force dispossessed Holocaust survivors and their heirs to litigate to track the artworks.

The U.S. State Department should intervene in the case and ask the Sixth Circuit to reconsider in light of Bernstein.   Tennessee shouldn't be the only state in the U.S. that lost World War II.

Westfield v Fed Rep of Germany 6th Circuit Feb 2 2011

210 F.2d 375

BERNSTEIN, v. N. V. NEDERLANDSCHE- AMERIKAANSCHE STOOMVAART- MAATSCHAPPIJ

(Chemical Bank& Trust Co., Third-Party Defendant). No. 21193.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 11, 1954.
Decided Feb. 5, 1954.
Bennet, House & Couts, New York City, for plaintiff-petitioner; Victor House, Albert I. Edelman and Werner Ilsen, New York City, of counsel.
Burlingham, Hupper & Kennedy, New York City, for defendant Holland-America Line; Harold M. Kennedy, and Harvey C. Allen, Jr., New York City, of counsel.

Sherman & Sterling & Wright, New York City, for Third-Party Defendant, Chemical Bank & Trust Company; John A. Wilson, M. VanVoorhies and Edmond K. Leach, New York City, of counsel.

Petition to amend the mandate of this court handed down in a prior appeal in this case, 173 F.2d 71. Petition granted.

Before AUGUSTUS N. HAND, CLARK and FRANK, Circuit Judges.

Petition to amend the mandate of this court handed down in a prior appeal in this case, 173 F.2d 71. Petition granted.

PER CURIAM.

In the prior appeal in this case, 173 F.2d 71, 75-76, because of the lack of a definitive expression of Executive Policy, we felt constrained to follow the decision of this court in Bernstein v. Van Heyghen Freres Societe Anonyme, 2 Cir., 163 F.2d 246, certiorari denied 332 U.S. 772, 68 S.Ct. 88, 92 L.Ed. 357, by ordering the plaintiff to refrain from alleging matters which would cause the court to pass on the validity of acts of officials of the German government. Following our decision, however, the State Department issued Press Release No. 296 on April 27, 1949, entitled: 'Jurisdiction of United States Courts Re Suits for Identifiable Property Involved in Nazi Forced Transfers.' The substance of this Release follows:
2

'As a matter of general interest, the Department publishes herewith a copy of a letter of April 13, 1949 from Jack B. Tate, Acting Legal Advisor, Department of State, to the Attorneys for the plaintiff in Civil Action No. 31-555 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
3
'The letter repeats this Government's opposition to forcible acts of dispossession of a discriminatory and confiscatory nature practiced by the Germans on the countries or peoples subject to their controls; states that it is this Government's policy to undo the forced transfers and restitute identifiable property to the victims of Nazi persecution wrongfully deprived of such property; and sets forth that the policy of the Executive, with respect to claims asserted in the United States for restitution of such property, is to relieve American courts from any restraint upon the exercise of their jurisdiction to pass upon the validity of the acts of Nazi officials.'
4
The letter from Mr. Tate is then quoted, pertinent parts of which follow:
5
'1. This Government has consistently opposed the forcible acts of dispossession of a discriminatory and confiscatory nature practiced by the Germans on the countries or people subject to their controls. * * *
6
'3. The policy of the Executive, with respect to claims asserted in the United States for the restitution of identifiable property (or compensation in lieu thereof) lost through force, coercion, or duress as a result of Nazi persecution in German, is to relieve American courts from any restraint upon the exercise of their jurisdiction to pass upon the validity of the acts of Nazi officials.'
7
In view of this supervening expression of Executive Policy, we amend our mandate in this case by striking out all restraints based on the inability of the court to pass on acts of officials in Germany during the period in question. See 173 F.2d at pages 75-76. This will permit the district court to accept the Release in evidence and conduct the trial of this case without regard to the restraint we previously placed upon it.
.
 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2010 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here  

Art Litigation: Nazi-Era Art Restitution - Legal Update Jan 24 New York State Bar Association

Nazi-Era Art Restitution Legal Update NYSBA EASL Jan 24 2011



On Monday January 24, 2011 I will be part of a panel organized by the New York State Bar Association' Entertainment Arts and Sports Law Section, flyer above, direct link and program description below.

http://www.nysba.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Event_List&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=45158

1:35-3:30 p.m. NAZI-ERA ART RESTITUTION: RECENT CASE DEVELOPMENTS


This program will address recent cases brought by heirs of Holocaust victims concerning the ownership of
artworks claimed to have been looted or sold under duress during the Nazi era. When the art resurfaced –
often decades later – in the hands of museums, collectors, galleries and auction houses, ownership disputes
have raised complex procedural, substantive, and policy issues. This panel includes lawyers representing
both sides of several high-profile cases, including the eleven-year battle which resulted in a $19 million
settlement with the Leopold Museum in Vienna in the Egon Schiele - Portrait of Wally case and the
seven-year battle with the Republic of Austria, which resulted in the restitution to the family of Holocaust
victims of a number of important works by Gustav Klimt, valued, in the aggregate, in excess of $300
million. The esteemed panelists will also discuss cases involving the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, the
Norton Simon Museum in Pasadena, and descendants of families who are laying claim to works by Picasso,
Pissarro, Schiele, Kokoschka, Klimt, and Lucas Cranach the Elder

 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook 2010 by Raymond J. Dowd from West here  

A Thief Cannot Pass Good Title: Research Tips on West Reference Attorney Blog

How does one research a Nazi art looting case?

Coverage of the Bakalar v. Vavra case and interview with me in the wake of my victory for the heirs of Fritz Grunbaum at the Second Circuit at the West Reference Attorney Blog under the heading "A Thief Cannot Pass Good Title" here.

I met a number of West Reference Attorneys when I took a tour of the West HQ and printing plant in Eagan, MN.  They are a great group, check out their blog for the latest topics in legal research/news.

 More on Fritz Grunbaum and the theft of artworks from him when he was in the Dachau concentration camp here.

For a translation of the Second Circuit's Bakalar v. Vavra decision into German, go here.


Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook from West here  

10/6 Dunnington Sponsors Morgenthau Reception at Museum of Jewish Heritage for NYCLA Sustaining Members

I am co-hosting an evening at the Museum of Jewish Heritage on October 6 for Sustaining Members of the New York County Lawyers' Association.  If you are not a Sustaining Member, sign up now!

Dear Sustaining Member,

I cordially invite you to join me at The Morgenthaus Exhibit at the Museum of Jewish Heritage, and to a private reception on Wednesday, October 6, 2010 from 6:00PM-8:00PM (reception 7:00PM).
Our special guest will be Robert M. Morgenthau. The Museum is located at 36 Battery Place, New York, NY (click here for directions). The support provided by Sustaining Members like you makes much of what we do possible, and assures that NYCLA has a strong voice when we collectively speak out on all the vital issues that affect the bar and the public. Thank you for contributing to over 100 years of excellence at the Home of Law.

The Morgenthaus: A Legacy of Service
The Morgenthaus have embraced the promise of America since their arrival in 1886. Wanting to contribute to their country and their communities, they dedicated themselves to public service. The exhibition tells the story of three generations of this family, and explores the fascinating ways in which their services to others changed the course of world events, American politics, and Jewish history.

I look forward to seeing you at this special event. RSVP: agluck@nycla.org. (Please reserve early as space is limited)

Sincerely,
James B. Kobak
NYCLA President
Chair: Hon. Louis Crespo · Co-Hosts: Hon. Stephen G. Crane & Raymond Dowd · Sponsors: Dunnington, Bartholow & Miller LLP; JAMS; Hon. Louis Crespo


Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook from West here  

Copyright and Fine Art: Rave Reviews at New York County Lawyers' Association

Corot's Portrait of a Girl

Last week I gave a three-hour CLE program at New York County Lawyers' Association on Copyright and Fine Art, together with the Hon. Stephen G. Crane of JAMS who acted as moderator:



Some nice words from NYCLA's Executive Director Bari Chase:

We just compiled the comments from Tuesday’s program and as you can see you got rave reviews.

“Speaker knew exactly what he was talking about. Very good job!”

“Loved it. Wonderful. Very interesting. (Please consider holding another art law symposium, too)”

“It was really interesting—pleasantly surprised”

“Perhaps the best seminar I’ve attended at NYCLA”

“The information was very interesting, and the speaker was clear, dynamic, and knowledgeable”



 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook from West here  

Art Litigation: Second Circuit Sends Art Ownership Dispute Back to the Drawing Board

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

The headless woman who invaded my life five years ago, a well-known fixation of mine known to readers of the Copyright Litigation Blog.  She is pretty much single handedly responsible for me learning a great deal about Nazi art looting and adding that dimension to a blog that started out with other intentions.  People seem to like the mix!

Article from NYLJ on Second Circuit reversal in Bakalar v. Vavra here.

More on the litigation and Bakalar v. Vavra decision here.

More on Nazi art looting here.

More on Fritz Grunbaum and other artworks stolen from him here.

 Purchase Copyright Litigation Handbook from West here