Facts: Franz Grunbaum was a Jewish man who lived In Vienna before World War 11. In 1938, the Nazis imprisoned him in the Dachau concentration camp, where he died three years later. The Nazis also confiscated his property, which included a valuable drawing. This drawing changed hands several times until it was eventually sold to David Bakalar in 1963. Years later, Franz Grumbaum's heirs, Milos Vavra and Leon Fischer, argued that they were true owners of the picture. At this point, it was worth an estimated $675,00. The trial court disagreed, finding that Bakalar was the drawings owner. Vavra and Fischer appealed.
In the Bakalar case involving artwork stolen during World War 11, do you agree with the court's decision? Should the heirs get a chance to recover the drawing that was stolen from their ancestor? Or should Bakalar who has owned the drawing for 50 years and knew nothing about its origin, be able to keep ownership.
I agree with the courts' decision. David Bakalar had purchased the drawing in good faith. He had paid the price for the drawing and had not known that the drawing had been stolen. The defense used in the court was the "laches". This is a doctrine that bars actions in which there is a lengthy delay in filing a claim. ...
The answer to this problem explains the Bakalar V. Vavra case. The references related to the answer are also included.