Imagine discovering a piece of your family history locked away in a museum, a painting by your late father, and then being told you can't have it back. This is precisely what's happening in Erie, Pennsylvania, sparking a legal battle that questions who truly owns a piece of art. An 82-year-old woman is suing the Erie Art Museum for the return of a watercolor painting by her father, the late Erie artist George C. Deimel, titled "House Boats," which has been in the museum's possession since 1966.
Georgia Heynes, Deimel's daughter, claims the museum lacks documented proof of ownership for the artwork, which depicts houseboats on Horseshoe Pond at Presque Isle State Park. According to the lawsuit, the painting, valued at approximately $200, has been part of the museum's collection for 59 years. Heynes argues that as the heir to her father's estate, the painting rightfully belongs to her. Deimel, who passed away in 1967 at the age of 53, was a prominent figure in the Erie art scene, serving as the art coordinator for the Erie School District and a past president of the Art Center of Erie (now the Erie Art Museum). "House Boats" was submitted to the 43rd Annual May Show of the Art Center of Erie in 1966 but wasn't selected and didn't sell at its listed price of $75.
The museum, however, is standing firm. They maintain that "House Boats" is a part of their permanent collection and that they have no intention of releasing it. The painting gained renewed attention when it was featured in the 2018-2019 exhibit "Everything But the Shelves," showcasing the museum's extensive holdings.
Heynes' pursuit of the painting began after seeing it at the exhibit. Here's where it gets controversial: initially, there seemed to be a glimmer of hope. The lawsuit reveals that in March 2019, the museum's then-CEO, Joshua Helmer, signed a letter of agreement with Heynes, outlining a potential process for "deaccessioning" the painting – essentially removing it from the permanent collection. The letter stated that before any deaccession, the artwork would be offered to the artist's closest living relatives. But the museum never followed through with the deaccession.
Fast forward to October 2024, Heynes contacted the museum again, only to discover, according to her lawsuit, that the museum possesses no deed of gift for "House Boats," leading her to believe they lack proof of ownership. Her lawyer, Joseph DePalma, sent a formal request for the painting's return, even offering a donation to the museum in exchange, as Heynes wished to gift the painting to one of her children or grandchildren.
And this is the part most people miss: The museum declined, citing ethical guidelines from the Association of Art Museum Directors, which discourage exchanging donations for pieces in a permanent collection. The museum's lawyer, S. Craig Shamburg, stated that they would only consider the 2019 agreement if the Board of Directors decided to deaccession the painting in the future. This refusal prompted Heynes to file the lawsuit, seeking a court order for the painting's return.
The legal action is a civil suit for replevin, demanding the return of property believed to be wrongfully withheld. The lawsuit asserts that the Erie Art Museum lacks both a deed of gift and any ownership interest in "House Boats," arguing that it should be returned to Deimel's heir.
The core question in this case is: Does the lack of a formal deed of gift automatically invalidate the museum's claim to ownership, especially after holding the painting for so many decades? What responsibilities do museums have to maintain thorough records of their collections? And should family history trump a museum's claim to a piece of its permanent collection? This case raises fundamental questions about art ownership, museum ethics, and the balance between preserving cultural heritage and honoring family legacies. What do you think? Should the museum return the painting, even without a deed of gift, or does its long-term possession grant them a legitimate claim? Sound off in the comments below!
