Jennifer Kreder, a participant in ARCA's 2010 International Art Crime Conference where she spoke about the issues of Nazi-era looted restitution claims, would like to clarify an opinion of hers that was roughly quoted in the New York Times in the October 12 article, "For Florida Museum, Dispute Over Romano Painting is a Boon".
A U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Florida ordered the Mary Brogan Museum of Art and Science in Tallahassee to 'hold onto' a 16th century painting by Girolamo Romano, on loan from the Pinacoteca di Brera in Milan at the close of a Baroque exhibition last month. The American Institution "renegotiated its contract to display" Christ Carrying the Cross Dragged by a Rogue (1538) while 'Italian officials in Rome' 'negotiate with the family of Giuseppe Gentili, which says the collaborationist Vichy government in France seize dthe painting and sold it at auction in 1941,' journalist Patricia Cohen reported.
Kreder is Chair of the American Society of International Law’s Interest Group on Cultural Heritage and the Arts and Professor at Salmon P. Chase College of Law in Northern Kentucky University.
According to Jen Kreder, something got lost in translation by the time the article hit the press. Although Kreder cannot comment on the merits of the claim, she said that it is particularly surprising that no one on the Italian side, which had knowledge of the claim, seems to have insisted that the museum apply for immunity from seizure, which is not available after the object is in the U.S. Before this incident, Professor Kreder published the following article in the Washington University Law Review discussing the prior Wally, Benningson/Alsdorf Picasso and Jullian Fallat seizures, which may be of interest to readers: http://lawreview.wustl.edu/commentaries/executive-weapons-to-combat-infections-of-the-art-market/.