## Facts

- Two Albrecht Dürer portraits (c. 1499) were part of the public Weimar art collections and were displayed by the state museum in Weimar, Germany.
- During World War II, the museum director moved the paintings to Schwarzburg Castle for safekeeping.
- In spring 1945, U.S. troops occupied and guarded the castle; after the troops withdrew in summer 1945, the paintings disappeared.
- In 1946, Edward Elicofon, a New York resident, bought the portraits in Brooklyn from an American ex-serviceman, unaware they were stolen or valuable; he displayed them openly for years.
- After the works were identified as wartime losses, competing demands were made for their return; the dispute ultimately proceeded between Kunstsammlungen zu Weimar (the museum and successor to the pre-loss public collection) and Elicofon.

## Issues

1. Whether the portraits were public property of the Weimar museum (and its successor) or private dynastic property claimed by a former ruling family member.
2. Whether the evidence established that the paintings were stolen in 1945 from Schwarzburg Castle.
3. Whether a good-faith purchaser in New York can obtain valid title to stolen artwork acquired from a seller lacking title, and which jurisdiction’s law governs that question.

## Decision

- The district court granted summary judgment for Kunstsammlungen zu Weimar and ordered return of the portraits.
- The court held the paintings were part of the public Weimar collection and that title passed through successor governmental entities to the museum claimant.
- The court found the record showed beyond dispute that the paintings disappeared during or immediately after the 1945 occupation and inferred they were stolen.
- Applying New York law, the court ruled that a thief (or one holding through a thief) cannot convey good title; Elicofon’s good faith and open possession did not defeat the museum’s claim.
- The Second Circuit affirmed substantially for the reasons given by the district court.

## Legal Principles

- Under New York law, a person who steals property or possesses it through a theft cannot transfer good title to a subsequent purchaser, even if the purchaser acted in good faith.
- In a restitution claim for stolen art located in New York, New York choice-of-law principles may apply New York’s rule protecting the true owner over foreign rules that might recognize good-faith acquisition.
- Ownership of cultural property may turn on whether the work was held as public museum property versus private dynastic property; regime change and state succession do not, by themselves, extinguish a public institution’s title.

## Conclusion

The courts required restitution of two Dürer portraits to the Weimar museum because the works were proven stolen in 1945 and New York law barred Elicofon from acquiring valid title from a seller lacking ownership, notwithstanding his good-faith purchase and long, open possession.


Kunstsammlungen zu Weimar v. Elicofon, 536 F. Supp. 829 (E.D.N.Y. 1981), aff’d, 678 F.2d 1150 (2d Cir. 1982)