SLAM Dunks Declaratory Judgment Action, Leaving Feds With No Forum to Claim That Ka Nefer Nefer is Stolen

Judge James Loken hinted during oral arguments in January that the federal government's effort to forfeit the Ka Nefer Nefer mummy mask still might have life even if the Eighth Circuit Court denied the government’s appeal. But now the federal government's case is truly dead.

Two weeks ago the court of appeals ruled against federal lawyers, halting their effort to forfeit the mummy mask on procedural grounds. And now district court Judge Henry Autrey has signed off on the St. Louis Art Museum’s (SLAM) notice to dismiss the museum’s separate declaratory judgment action.

Readers will recall that the declaratory judgment case was the initial SLAM mummy mask case, whereby the museum petitioned to establish exclusive title to the artifact. Before the U.S. government filed a forfeiture complaint in March 2011, SLAM started its own civil action for declaratory relief in federal district court, seeking to quiet the title of the 19th Dynasty Egyptian mask. The museum's February 2011 petition stated that the

Museum respectfully seeks declaratory relief to declare the respective rights of the parties with regard to the Mask, specifically that (1) the right of the United States to seek seizure and/or forfeiture pursuant to the provisions of the Tariff Act of 1930 (“Tariff Act”) is foreclosed by the applicable statute of limitations set forth in 19 U.S.C. § 1621, and (2) the provisions of Egyptian Law No. 215 [on the Protection of Antiquities] do not establish the Mask is Egypt's property, nor can the Defendants establish reasonable cause to believe the Mask was 'stolen, smuggled, or clandestinely imported or introduced' into the United States pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1595a.

During oral arguments about the forfeiture case, the Eighth Circuit suggested that the government could still argue the forfeiture claim as a defense in the declaratory judgment action. But with SLAM’s voluntarily withdrawal of the declaratory judgment suit last week, federal authorities are now left with no forum to argue their claim that the mask is stolen property that cannot be owned by SLAM.

Federal attorneys told the court of appeals earlier this year, "It was the museum that precipitated a judicial intervention by filing the declaratory judgment, explaining ""Our preference was to reach a mediated solution to this dispute ...."  But SLAM has now beaten the forfeiture case and, predictably, the institution has no interest arguing title.

What’s next? Perhaps nothing. Statutes of limitations may close the door on several legal alternatives. It is difficult to know what federal, state, legal, mediated, or political options are being discussed at this time, if any. But if such discussions are taking place, one would expect that SLAM’s governing structureis being probed as a possible requisite for action by private parties or public authorities (e.g., the Missouri attorney general). The museum is funded by property tax dollars, governed by a politically appointed board, and receives financial assistance from a supporting nonprofit organization. For now, however, the Ka Nefer Nefer case will stay in the afterlife.

By Rick St. Hilaire

Text copyrighted 2010-2014 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Blog url: culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Getty Mounts Preemptive Legal Strike: Museum Seeks to Quiet Title of 14th Century Ansouis Diptych

The Getty Museum has launched a preemptive legal strike to stop a French citizen from taking a 14th century Diptych from its collection. In a legal complaint filed in federal district court in California, the museum seeks an order quieting the title of The Stigmatization of Saint Francis and The Crowning of Saints Cecilia and Valerian, the so-called "Ansouis Diptych" pictured here.

The Getty alleges that the defendant, Geraud Marie de Sabran-Ponteves, erroneously claims the religious piece for himself as part of "long-running inheritance dispute."  The museum says it owns the Diptych.

The Getty's lawyers insist that the Los Angeles based museum lawfully purchased the Diptych in 1986 from Wildenstein & Co. gallery in New York City. Wildenstein, meanwhile, purchased it in 1981 from the Sabran-Ponteves family, who are shown on the Diptych and who owned the work "for hundreds of years." The lawyers argue:

Wildenstein warrantedthat it owned the Diptych, that it had been legally importedinto the UnitedStates, and that there were no liens or encumbrances against it. In addition,the Getty undertooka reasonable investigation of the painting's provenance, as well as its authenticity.  That investigation confirmed that the Diptychhad been possessedand owned by theHouse of Sabran until its acquisition by Wildenstein, and yielded nothing that cast doubt on the validity of Wildenstein's representations.

The museum's complaint stresses that the defendant knew the museum had the Diptych in 1987, "[y]et, Defendant made no effort even to contact the Getty until August 1999. When he did contactthe Getty, Defendant did notassert ownership to the Diptychor demand its return." The letter simply asked for assistance to aid with the valuation of the family's estate. "Then in the summer of 2012," the lawyers add, "Defendant 's French counsel sent the Getty two letters in which Defendant claimed, for the first time, tobe the sole owner of the Ansouis Diptych. The letters asserted that the family'ssale of the Diptych-some 30 years earlier-was unauthorized, and that the Diptych had been illegally exported from France."

Before a threatened claim could be filed by Sabran-Ponteves in civil court in Paris to recover the Diptych, the Getty decided to take legal action in the U.S., arguing that it has valid title; that the defendant is barred from taking the piece by virtue of the statute of limitations; and, alternatively, that the Getty owns the Ansouis Diptych by adverse possession. 

Photo credit: Digital image courtesy of the Getty's Open Content Program. Unknown Italian, Neapolitan or Avignon School, The Stigmatization of St. Francis, and Angel Crowning Saints Cecilia and Valerian, 1330s, Tempera and gold leaf on panel. The J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles.

This post is researched, written, and published on the blog Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire at culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Text copyrighted 2010-2013 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com