This is a brief excerpt from the document you requested from IFAR’s Art Law & Cultural Property Database.
Case Summary
Schoeps v. Museum of Modern Art
Schoeps v. Museum of Modern Art and Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation, 594 F. Supp. 2d 461 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) (denying museum’s motion for summary judgment), 603 F. Supp. 2d 673 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) (ordering settlement to be filed under seal).
Précis
In this case involving two important Picasso paintings allegedly sold under duress in Germany during the Nazi-era, the court found that the heirs of the paintings’ pre-WWII owner had enough evidence to defeat a motion for
summary judgment
A judgment granted on a claim or defense about which there is no genuine issue of material fact and upon which the movant is entitled to prevail as a matter of law. The court considers the contents of the pleadings, the motions, and additional evidence adduced by the parties to determine whether there is a genuine issue of material fact rather than one of law. This procedural device allows the speedy disposition of a controversy without the need for trial (Black’s Law Dictionary (8th ed. 2004)).
summary judgment made by the two New York museums to which the works were later donated – the Guggenheim and the Museum of Modern Art. The museums were seeking a judgment that the heirs had no ownership claim to the paintings because the 1935 sale was voluntary and not forced. The court . . . .
Associated Legal Decision(s)
Click here to subscribe to IFAR's Art Law & Cultural Property Database to access this and other documents about U.S. and international legislation and case law concerning the acquisition, authenticity, export, ownership, and copyright of art objects.
