Warning

Info

Table of Contents
Chris22, HLS '22 |

0 0

Back to briefs

Kunstsammlungen zu Weimar v. Elicofon

(1981)

United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York - 536 F. Supp. 829

tl;dr:

One who steals property or obtains possession of it through theft cannot transfer good title to a good faith purchaser.

Video Summary

ICRAIssue, Conclusion, Rule, Analysis for Kunstsammlungen zu Weimar v. Elicofon

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Kunstsammlungen zu Weimar v. Elicofon case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

Facts & HoldingKunstsammlungen zu Weimar v. Elicofon case brief facts & holding

Facts:An American soldier stole two paintings from the Kunstsammlungen museum...

Holding:The court held that the defendant did not have a...

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Kunstsammlungen zu Weimar v. Elicofon case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

DeepDiveHighlight a legal term to see the definition

Font size -+
Kunstsammlungen zu Weimar v. Elicofon | Case Brief DeepDive
Majority opinion, author: MISHLER, District Judge.
Level 1
Click below 👇 to DeepDive

The Federal Republic of Germany filed a lawsuit in 1969 to recover two stolen portraits by Albrecht Duerer found in the possession of Elicofon in Brooklyn, New York. The Kunstsammlungen zu Weimar museum and the Grand Duchess of Saxony-Weimar both claimed ownership of the paintings and were granted the right to intervene as plaintiffs. The court ruled that Elicofon could not have acquired good title to the paintings, even if he purchased them without knowledge of their source, as they were stolen property. The court confirmed that a thief cannot transfer good title to a purchaser, even if the purchaser acted in good faith, according to BGB § 932. The court also confirmed that Military Government Law No. 52 voided any transfer of cultural property, making it illegal to transfer or acquire any property without authorization from the Military Government. The court upheld the authority of the American Military Occupation Forces to promulgate Law No. 52 to protect public art treasures in Thuringia and Schwarzburg. The court determined that New York law governs the question of title, and Elicofon did not acquire title under Ersitzung. The statute of limitations for the action was tolled from 1949 to 1974 when the German Democratic Republic was not recognized by the US government. The court found that the action commenced in 1969 would not have been time-barred, even if the cause of action accrued in 1946.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Kunstsammlungen zu Weimar v. Elicofon case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

🤯 High points 🤯Key points contributed by students on LSD

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Kunstsammlungen zu Weimar v. Elicofon case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

LSD+ Case Briefs

Features

  • DeepDive for detailed case analysis
  • Over 50,000 existing case briefs
  • Instant briefs for another 6,000,000 cases
  • Highlight dictionary for legal term definitions
  • Social learning with chat and high points

Over 50,000 Cases Briefed

LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.

14-Day Free Trial

Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.

Integrated Legal Dictionary

Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.

Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.

DeepDive

DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.

Brief anything. Instantly.

Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.

Social Learning with Chat and High Points

Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.

Real-Time Brief Feedback

Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.

Kunstsammlungen zu Weimar v. Elicofon

Chat for Kunstsammlungen zu Weimar v. Elicofon
brief-642
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.