Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

LA Judge Rules Against San Diego Jewish Family Over $30M Painting Looted By Nazis
cbs2la ^

Posted on 05/02/2019 12:05:17 PM PDT by BenLurkin

A 15-year court battle has seemingly come to an end after an L.A. federal judge ruled Tuesday that a Spanish museum which acquired a $30 million painting looted by the Nazis is the work’s rightful owner, and not the San Diego Jewish family of a woman who surrendered it 80 years ago to escape the Holocaust.

In his 34-page ruling Tuesday, U.S. District Judge John F. Walter found no evidence the museum knew it was looted art when it took possession in 1993.

According to the lawsuit first filed in L.A. federal court in 2005, the Nazis confiscated the painting from Lilly Cassirer, whose Jewish family owned a prominent art gallery in Berlin in the 1930s. Lilly Cassirer was among the last of the family to flee ahead of the Holocaust. As she tried to leave Germany, a Nazi official forced her to surrender the painting in exchange for the exit visa she needed. Her sister, who remained, was later killed in a Nazi death camp.

The painting was purchased directly from Pissarro’s art dealer in 1900 by the father-in-law of Lilly Cassirer, who eventually inherited it and displayed it in her home for years. When she and her family fled the Holocaust in 1939, she traded it for passage out of the country.

For years the family thought it was lost, and the German government paid her $13,000 in reparations in 1958

(Excerpt) Read more at losangeles.cbslocal.com ...


TOPICS: US: California
KEYWORDS: art; judge; nazis; painting; sandiego; ww2
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-104 next last

1 posted on 05/02/2019 12:05:17 PM PDT by BenLurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

“No evidence the museum knew it was looted”.

What does that have to do with anything? WTF?


2 posted on 05/02/2019 12:08:43 PM PDT by Freedom4US
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Seems to me that there should be no need to prove that the art was looted.All that should be required is for the plaintiff to prove that it was,in fact,stolen from his/her family by the Nazis.

If the museum paid serious money for it...even if they didn't know it was stolen...tough luck for the museum.

3 posted on 05/02/2019 12:08:52 PM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Bill Barr:The Bill Belichick of Attorneys General)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

If she traded it, then she didn’t own it when the Nazis confiscated it.


4 posted on 05/02/2019 12:09:10 PM PDT by P-Marlowe (Freep mail me if you want to be on my Fingerstyle Acoustic Guitar Ping List)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Freedom4US

Beat me by 9 seconds...


5 posted on 05/02/2019 12:09:28 PM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Bill Barr:The Bill Belichick of Attorneys General)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

so, according to this ruling, if a woman had a child stolen by nazis- who later sold the child to some other family, the child would no longer be mother’s ‘because the new family didn’t know the child was stolen/kidnapped? wow, just wow!


6 posted on 05/02/2019 12:10:57 PM PDT by Bob434
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

Traded it for her life???????????????????????????????????


7 posted on 05/02/2019 12:11:02 PM PDT by petitfour (APPEAL TO HEAVEN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

John F. Walter found no evidence the museum knew it was looted art when it took possession in 1993

~~~

So, no concept of “receiving stolen property” here?

Likewise, a family that lost it due to the gravest of duress has no rights to it either.

I feel bad for the museum that (there is no evidence showing) knew it was looted, but it certainly didn’t belong to them before this. Take up with those who peddled it.

What about all these people who lose their rights to plunder shipwrecks and discovered riches, because courts rule that there are historical and legacy rights to account for? Shouldn’t the family history of the item pre-empt some museum’s commercial curator interest?


8 posted on 05/02/2019 12:12:16 PM PDT by z3n
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
If she traded it, then she didn’t own it when the Nazis confiscated it.

...a Nazi official forced her to surrender the painting in exchange for the exit visa...

Translation: the Nazis stole it.End of story.Finding for the plaintiff! Next case!

9 posted on 05/02/2019 12:12:17 PM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Bill Barr:The Bill Belichick of Attorneys General)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: petitfour

Sounds like she got a good deal.


10 posted on 05/02/2019 12:12:25 PM PDT by P-Marlowe (Freep mail me if you want to be on my Fingerstyle Acoustic Guitar Ping List)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

[[As she tried to leave Germany, a Nazi official forced her to surrender the painting in exchange for the exit visa she needed.]]

In otherwords- she was FORCED to trade it- in other words- the Nazis stole it- the granting of exit visa played no part- she was forced into this- it was stolen


11 posted on 05/02/2019 12:13:28 PM PDT by Bob434
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
". . . the German government paid her $13,000 in reparations in 1958"

Wait a minute, if the family already received reparations from the German government, how can they even bring suit against the museum?

12 posted on 05/02/2019 12:14:22 PM PDT by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

Have you noticed these days have no common sense, and therefore the common man does not see justice done.

Sad, and these people can’t hope to for sure be alive when its appealed to higher courts because they are already in their 80’s.


13 posted on 05/02/2019 12:14:34 PM PDT by Zenjitsuman ( p)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Freedom4US
Because museums don't buy stolen goods. If they think it is stolen goods they will not buy it, and if they find out it is, they have to surrender it. This is why museums go through extensive research to establish provenance of a work of art. Sounds to me like this museum didn't do their job very well.
14 posted on 05/02/2019 12:14:45 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard (Power is more often surrendered than seized.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: z3n

[[Likewise, a family that lost it due to the gravest of duress has no rights to it either.]]

Huh? So a woman who loses a child to kidnapping loses all rights to her child?


15 posted on 05/02/2019 12:14:45 PM PDT by Bob434
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Proper ruling.

The painting wasn't stolen from Lilly, she traded it in exchange for something else (exit visa) therefore her family is not entitled to it.

16 posted on 05/02/2019 12:15:52 PM PDT by CivilWarBrewing (Get off my back for my usage of CAPS, especially you snowflake males! MAN UP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Who is “Pissarro”? Was this supposed to have been the artist?


17 posted on 05/02/2019 12:17:08 PM PDT by RitchieAprile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bob434

Bad example! Kidnapping is not a TRADE.


18 posted on 05/02/2019 12:17:38 PM PDT by CivilWarBrewing (Get off my back for my usage of CAPS, especially you snowflake males! MAN UP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin
I agree.....Reading between the lines, the whole thing sounds like a scam.

The family thought it was lost?? That doesn't fit.

19 posted on 05/02/2019 12:20:30 PM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: CivilWarBrewing

no it isn’t- they ‘kidnapped’ the painting by forcing her to surrender it- and allowed her to leave- the only alternative was die- either way- the nazis were leaving with a painting that wasn’t theirs-


20 posted on 05/02/2019 12:20:43 PM PDT by Bob434
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-104 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson