APPLYING A STRICT DISCOVERY RULE TO ART STOLEN IN THE PAST

There is a great deal of un-recovered stolen art, and a great deal of confusion within and among jurisdictions as to when the applicable sta tute of limitations for stolen art begins to run. Holistic legal refor m in this area is long overdue. Recent proposals, responding to curren t practices in the art world, call for the adoption of an art theft re gistry to help effectuate the return of stolen art and provide efficie ncy in the marketplace. However, a great number of objects fall outsid e the effective scope of these proposals: art that was stolen in the p ast, and those artworks which are not subject to effective registratio n. This Note suggests that these twin problems of retroactivity and no n-registrability are best dealt with by the adoption of a ''strict'' d iscovery rule. This rule provides that the statute of limitations does not begin to run until the true owner becomes aware of the identity o f the possessor of his or her artwork-irrespective of the owner's ''di ligence'' in searching for the art. This Note thus proposes a two-part solution to the problems inherent in determining when the statute of limitations for stolen art begins to run: (1) future victims of art th eft would be required to register their stolen artwork in order to tol l the statute of limitations; and (2) victims of past thefts, or futur e victims of art theft whose artworks are not registrable, will have t he statute of limitations tolled until they become aware of the identi ty of the current possessor of their artworks.