A U.S. court dismissed a lawsuit against a German museum foundation over a medieval treasure trove at the heart of a long-running ownership dispute stemming back to Nazi Germany.
The foundation, called Stiftung Preussischer Kulturbesitz, said on Tuesday that the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted its motion last week to dismiss the 2015 lawsuit filed by heirs of Nazi-era Jewish art dealers who requested compensation from Germany for the sale of the Guelph Treasure trove that they claimed the ancestors were forced to sell for less than the items were worth. The trove contained items worth approximately $200 million, including silver and gold crucifixes, altars, and intricate silverwork.
NEW YORK MUSEUMS REQUIRED TO PUT SIGNS NEXT TO ART LOOTED BY NAZIS
Stiftung Preussischer Kulturbesitz has denied the claims, arguing that the treasure was not even in Germany at the time of its sale in 1935, according to the Associated Press. The foundation’s president, Hermann Parzinger, welcomed the ruling in a press release.
“SPK is pleased with the district court’s ruling, which affirms SPK’s long-held assessment that this lawsuit seeking the restitution of the Guelph Treasure should not be heard in a U.S. court,” Parzinger said. “SPK has also long maintained that this lawsuit lacked merit, as the Guelph Treasure’s sale in 1935 was not a forced sale due to Nazi persecution.”
The collection is currently displayed at Berlin’s Bode Museum and has been displayed in Berlin since the 1960s. The collection is considered the largest collection of German church treasures in public hands, according to the news outlet.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The claim was initially filed in Germany, but a German court determined that the family received a fair price for the items and was not forced to sell the items. The heirs then filed a suit in the United States, which was opposed by Germany and the foundation.
The Supreme Court agreed with Germany in a ruling last year that determined the case could not be heard in the U.S. due to the U.S. Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act, but the case was reopened by the District Court, according to the foundation’s press release.
