Art Institute of Chicago Must Return Nazi-Looted Schiele Work to Heirs

Art Institute of Chicago Must Return Nazi-Looted Schiele Work to Heirs

New York Supreme Court Judge Althea Drysdale on April 23 ordered theArt Institute of Chicagoto return a drawing by Austrian Expressionist Egon Schiele to the heirs of its onetime owner, who died in a concentration camp in 1941. Drysdale’s ruling followed the discovery by the Manhattan district attorney’s office that the 1916 drawing,Russian War Prisoner, had been stolen from Austrian Jewish cabaret entertainer Fritz Grünbaum by Nazis.

The Art Institute purchased the drawing in 1966 from Swiss dealer Eberhard Kornfeld. It is one of a trove of works that Grünbaum, an outspoken Nazi critic, is believed to have signed over, under duress, to the Reich in 1938, and that were auctioned off after his death in Dachau three years later.Russian War Prisonerwasseized in placein 2023 by the Manhattan DA’s office.

The museum had argued that the work was not purloined and that it had lawfully obtained it, pointing to documentation provided by Kornfeld showing that he had purchased the drawing from Mathilde Lukacs, Grünbaum’s sister-in-law, whom the Art Institute contended had rightfully inherited it. As well, the museum challenged the authority of the Manhattan DA’s office, on the grounds that the drawing had not resided in New York for nearly sixty years.

New York investigators, however, showed that Kornfeld’s claim to the work was likely false, citing as evidence several invoices presented by the dealer connected to the purchase on which Lukac’s signature was misspelled. Judge Drysdale in her ruling acknowledged that it was “highly improbable” that Lukacs had ever obtained proper title to the work and accused the museum of failing to perform due diligence in acquiring the drawing, writing that they “instead relied upon the assurances of a discredited art dealer with an obvious self-serving agenda.”

“We are disappointed with the ruling,” said a museum spokesperson in a statement. “We are reviewing the court’s decision and will look at all available options for appeal.”