He surrendered the painting - it was not ‘seized from his living room’. Drama queen!!!!!!
Actually not - as reported in the article, the legal terminology is just that, "seizure", as they had stolen property and thus subject to that legal definition.
Receiving no formal request for the painting’s return, we felt we were repatriating of our own volition. Reading the necessary paperwork, however, there was no avoiding the terminology being used: seizure.
Had you read the article, it explains that although (according to this account) he and his partner voluntarily surrrendered the painting, they had to sign government paperwork that used the term "seizure" to define the transfer of custody of the art.