After sitting on ice for seven years, a high-stakes lawsuit over an Edgar Degas pastel that heirs say was looted by the Nazis is back in motion in Manhattan. Last Thursday, a state appellate panel lifted the long-running freeze, clearing the way for heirs to dig into how the work was marketed and sold in New York. The case now returns to Manhattan Supreme Court, with judges warning that any more delay could make it impossible for the family to piece together crucial facts in litigation that has been grinding along since 2013.
Appellate division lets the suit proceed
The Appellate Division, First Department issued a unanimous opinion that vacated an earlier stay and sent the case back to Supreme Court for further proceedings. The nearly decade-long pause, imposed in 2017 while the heirs chased related matters in European courts, has not produced any final resolution, the panel noted, and public policy, in its view, now favors letting the New York claims move forward. Those rulings are laid out in the written opinion from the New York State Unified Court System.
How the Degas changed hands
The Degas pastel, identified in court filings as Danseuses, belonged to collector Margaret Kainer before it was looted in 1935. According to the record, Christie’s first arranged a private sale in Japan for roughly $6 million, then brought the work to a November 2009 New York auction, where it sold for $10,722,500. A Restitution Settlement Agreement reportedly left a Swiss foundation with about $1.8 million from the earlier private sale. Those numbers and the deal’s timeline are laid out in the New York State Unified Court System.
Why judges moved the case forward
Writing for the panel, Judge John Higgitt said that “this long-dormant New York action seeking justice for a plunder that occurred in the ‘unique and horrific circumstances of World War II and the Holocaust’ should move forward,” and he flagged how years of inactivity have already hampered fact-finding. The judges noted that related proceedings in Switzerland have not meaningfully advanced and cautioned that “further delay could make it more difficult or impossible for the heirs to reconstruct facts.” Those observations appear in the appellate opinion from the New York State Unified Court System.
What’s next
With the remand in place, the plaintiffs can now press for discovery in Manhattan Supreme Court, including Christie’s internal files and communications about the 2009 sales. The appellate panel stressed that Christie’s “is free to seek a stay anew” if a Swiss resolution suddenly looks imminent, and it told the trial court to weigh plaintiffs’ arguments tied to a recent HEAR Act update once those claims are properly raised. The dispute has already wound through New York courts for years, including a 2021 Court of Appeals ruling, and was previously summarized in local coverage by amNY. Background on the appellate history is collected on Justia.
Legal implications
The ruling reopens some uncomfortable questions about where Holocaust-era restitution battles should be fought, how far auction houses must go when provenance is contested, and what counts as recognizing an heir’s claim. The plaintiffs say that Christie’s handling of a related Pissarro sale, along with language in its sale notices, amounted to recognition of their rights, while Christie’s maintains any acknowledgments were limited to that one dispute. Those competing legal theories and the underlying claims are detailed in the New York State Unified Court System, which will now frame the next round of discovery with the stay lifted.
