🔗 Share this article

The heirs of a Jewish pair have brought a case against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, asserting that a Vincent van Gogh art piece was stolen by the Nazis.

Origins of the Dispute

Per the legal filing, Hedwig and Frederick Stern acquired the artwork, titled Olive Picking, in the mid-1930s. A year after, they were compelled to leave their residence in Munich, Germany prior to WWII.

The legal action argues that the Met, which acquired the painting in 1956 for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, ought to have been aware it was likely stolen property. The descendants are now seeking the restitution of the artwork along with compensation.

Following World War II, this Nazi-looted painting has been often and discreetly exchanged, purchased and sold in and through the city of New York, alleges the legal filing.

Forced Emigration

Hedwig and Frederick Stern departed from the city of Munich to the United States in the late 1930s with their large family due to the oppressive Nazi regime. Yet, they were unable to bring the painting, which was produced by the Dutch post-impressionist in 1889.

Before the family's emigration, the regime classified the painting as German cultural property and banned the Sterns from exporting it. After obtaining permission from a Third Reich agent, a representative designated by the authorities sold the painting on the Sterns' behalf. However, the funds from the sale were deposited in a frozen account, which the authorities later seized.

Subsequent Ownership

Around 1948, or shortly after, the canvas entered the United States and was acquired by a prominent figure, a member of the Astor family. Later, it was sold through a art dealer to the Met, which then sold it to Greek shipping magnate Goulandris and his wife, Mrs. Goulandris, in the early 1970s.

The Greek couple set up the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which runs a gallery in Athens where the painting is currently on display.

Court Allegations

The foundation and a surviving nephew of Basil Goulandris are identified in the suit. The filing states that the defendants and its related entities have concealed and disguised the painting's ownership and whereabouts from the family.

Currently, the defendants continue to hide the manner and time the BEG came into control of the Painting; the family's possession of the masterpiece from 1935 to 1938; and the facts that the Nazis looted the Painting from the family, pressured the family into selling it via a Nazi-appointed agent, and took the funds of the deal.

Previous Legal Action

The descendants initiated a similar complaint in CA in 2022, but it was rejected in 2024. An further action was also dismissed in spring 2025.

The Met's Position

The lawsuit states that the Met's purchase of the artwork was approved by the museum's expert, the Met's authority of European art and one of the world's foremost experts on art theft during the Nazi era. Rousseau and the Met knew or should have known that the artwork had almost certainly been looted by Nazis.

The institution issued a statement that it takes seriously its ongoing pledge to resolve claims from the Nazi period.

A spokesperson stated: Not once during the museum's possession of the piece was there any record that it had once belonged to the family – actually, that data did not become available until many years after the masterpiece left the Museum's collection.

The institution's deaccessioning of the Van Gogh met the Met's guidelines for deaccessioning – specifically, it was noted that the artwork was judged to be of lesser quality than other works of the comparable nature in the inventory. Even though the museum respectfully stands by its position that this work entered the collection and was sold legally and well within all guidelines and policies, the museum is open to and will review any additional details that emerges.

Foundation's Defense

A lawyer acting for the Goulandris Foundation said: The institution is a esteemed foundation in the Greek capital. The effort to litigate and defame the institution and the family in the United States upon inaccurate and partial claims was earlier rejected, on two occasions. We are convinced it will be a third time.