🔗 Share this article

The descendants of a Jewish couple have filed a lawsuit against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, alleging that a Van Gogh art piece was stolen by Nazi forces.

Historical Background

Per the legal filing, Frederick and Hedwig Stern acquired the artwork, titled Gathering Olives, in the mid-1930s. A year after, they were obliged to escape their dwelling in Munich, Germany on the eve of the Second World War.

The suit argues that the museum, which purchased the artwork in the 1950s for $125,000, should have known it was almost certainly confiscated property. The descendants are now demanding the restitution of the painting along with financial restitution.

Since the end of World War II, this plundered piece has been frequently and covertly traded, bought and sold in and through New York, states the legal filing.

Family's Flight

The Sterns fled from Munich to the United States in the late 1930s with their offspring due to Nazi persecution. Yet, they were prevented from taking the painting, which was painted by the celebrated artist in 1889.

Before they left, the Nazi government classified the artwork as a German cultural asset and forbade the couple from exporting it. Following authorization from a Third Reich agent, a agent designated by the Nazis disposed of the artwork on the couple's behalf. But, the proceeds from the auction were placed in a blocked account, which the authorities later took.

Subsequent Ownership

In 1948, or soon after, the artwork entered New York and was acquired by a prominent figure, one of America's wealthiest people. Subsequently, it was exchanged through a gallery to the museum, which then sold it to Greek shipping magnate the magnate and his wife, Elise, in the early 1970s.

The Goulandris pair established the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in the late 1970s, which runs a museum in Athens, Greece where the artwork is currently exhibited.

Court Allegations

BEG and a family member of the magnate are listed as respondents. The filing claims that the family and its associated organizations have hidden and obscured the masterpiece's history and whereabouts from the heirs.

To this day, the Goulandris Defendants continue to hide how and when the institution came into control of the artwork; the couple's ownership of the masterpiece from the mid-1930s; and the facts that the Nazis stole the canvas from the family, pressured the family into parting with it via a trustee, and took the money of the sale.

Previous Legal Action

The descendants initiated a comparable case in California in recently, but it was dismissed in the following years. An appeal was also dismissed in May 2025.

The Met's Position

The legal action argues that the museum's acquisition of the piece was sanctioned by the museum's expert, the Met's authority of European art and one of the world's foremost experts on Nazi-era looted art. The curator and the museum knew or should have known that the Painting had probably been seized by the Nazis.

The museum issued a statement that it takes seriously its longstanding commitment to address claims from the Nazi period.

A spokesperson commented: Not once during the institution's custody of the artwork was there any record that it had previously been owned to the Stern family – in fact, that information did not become accessible until many years after the painting left the institution's holdings.

The museum's disposal of the Van Gogh met the Met's guidelines for deaccessioning – in particular, it was documented that the piece was judged to be of lower caliber than other works of the similar kind in the holdings. Even though the institution upholds its view that this piece entered the inventory and was sold lawfully and well within all guidelines and policies, the Met welcomes and will consider any additional details that is discovered.

Goulandris Statement

William Charron representing BEG commented: The Goulandris Foundation is a renowned institution in Greece. The action to take legal action against the institution and the family in the US upon deceptive and insufficient accusations was earlier rejected, on two occasions. We are confident it will be a third time.