you're kidding, right? did you read what you just wrote???
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 ...
I’m sure these art dealers knew the painting was worth more than the reparation, but were forced to either take it or nothing.
It’s messy but you’re right
you're kidding, right? did you read what you just wrote???
Reparations by definition are compensation for a loss. If she wants it back she should buy it. Otherwise, she or her family should have never agreed to take the money from the German government and continued to search for the painting.
Point taken. But legally, our elected representatives decide what taxes we should pay.
nobody was pointing a gun at Jews in 1939? Transactions were all above-board? The first concentration camp, Dachau, opened in 1933. Fear history lest it become future.
“In 1933, new German laws forced Jews out of their civil service jobs, university and law court positions, and other areas of public life. In April 1933, laws proclaimed at Nuremberg made Jews second-class citizens. These Nuremberg Laws defined Jews, not by their religion or by how they wanted to identify themselves, but by the religious affiliation of their grandparents. Between 1937 and 1939, new anti-Jewish regulations segregated Jews further and made daily life very difficult for them. Jews could not attend public schools; go to theaters, cinema, or vacation resorts; or reside or even walk in certain sections of German cities.
Also between 1937 and 1939, Jews increasingly were forced from Germany’s economic life. The Nazis either seized Jewish businesses and properties outright or forced Jews to sell them at bargain prices. In November 1938, the Nazis organized a riot (pogrom), known as Kristallnacht (the “Night of Broken Glass”). This attack against German and Austrian Jews included the physical destruction of synagogues and Jewish-owned stores, the arrest of Jewish men, the vandalization of homes, and the murder of individuals.”
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/1933-1939-early-stages-of-persecution/
This is a disgusting perversion of the law regarding cohesion. There was no question but that this woman was in genuine well founded fear for her life when the Nazi prick (Maybe Chelsea Handler’s grandfather) took the painting as a bribe to allow her to escape certain death in a death camp. The 13k from a disingenuous “shamed” German government in 1958 - probably still run by Nazis - is meaningless. The family could very well have thought they were getting a partial payment on what they were owed. But even if that was not the case the painting’s arrival on the “free market” was not legitimate and the Spanish government knew or should have knew (another element of law being pushed aside here) the painting was stolen.
Of course none of this means much now because by another twenty year there won’t be anyone in Andalusia who cares about western “art” and the painting will probably be burned along with the remaining Christian churches and synagogues.
“U.S. District Judge John F. Walter found no evidence the museum knew it was looted art when it took possession in 1993.”
Hereafter known as the pawnbrokers defense.
Yeah, try telling the cops and judge you didn’t know the stolen property you bought “out back” was stolen...
That is why, in 1939, Jews were selling everything they had of value to bribe officials for exit visas.
Sounds fair and square to me..........She sold it and now wants it back? Nope..........
In effect, the proverbial ‘gun-to-the-head’ makes it neat, tidy, and a legitimate transaction? Good to know how one feels about an armed mugging, when they demand-”The goods or your life.”
And sometimes the survivor that wouldn’t move on, paid a visit to let’s say Argentina, and retrieved those that had so far escaped a reckoning. A token amount of justice was thus claimed, for those who lacked a painting to exchange for the life of their family.
It’s interesting you mention that. The bank makes prospective home purchasers buy title insurance - but it’s for the bank’s protection, it won’t do the homeowner any good. The purchaser needs to purchase additional title insurance for himself to be protected.
You’re quite the optomist! /jk
Well.. huh. Thank you, I didn’t know that.
your missing the point- it’s not about whether it was a child or a painting- the point is the nazis took what didn’t belong to them, whether it be a child or a painting that they knew was very very valuable by force- by coercion under duress. I wouldn’t advise a parent to ‘just move on’ if their child was taken from them- nor would I advise someone to just move on when millions of dollars are on the line and was legally theirs before it was stolen from them by force- They are too old to reap any benefits now, but their families will reap if they can win this- and it’s a worthwhile endeavor to pursue for the sake of their younger families- I believe they realize it’s an uphill battle they may lose- but that shouldn’t stop them nor should it ruin their lives- it should drive their lives- God deosn’t demand we just ‘move on’ when great injustices are done to us- infact, He is the One that instituted the justice system, and people have every right to pursue justice even if it means appealing to the highest possible courts to do so-
golly- sounds like spain museums are the place to sell stolen art- apparently they buy no questions asked- thereby exonerating them of any accusations of knowledge? What a criminal racket that is
[[‘your honor, I had no idea the car was stolen. Do I get to keep it?]]
apparently if you live in spain you do as long as you are a museum employee
I would never tell someone who lost a child to move on; my point was that it’s a PAINTING not, as some have compared it, a child, . “Vengeance is Mine, sayeth the LORD, and I will repay!” These people are not going to get their painting, OR the money it’s worth. They already settled for reparations 60 years ago, and besides, Spain has their own laws, and they’re not going to change them for us.
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.