The descendants of a Jewish couple have brought a case against New York's Metropolitan Museum, asserting that a Van Gogh art piece was seized by Nazi forces.
Origins of the Dispute
As stated in the legal filing, Hedwig and Frederick Stern purchased the piece, titled Gathering Olives, in the year 1935. Just one year later, they were forced to flee their home in the German city of Munich on the eve of the Second World War.
The legal action states that the institution, which purchased the painting in the 1950s for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, ought to have been aware it was likely confiscated property. The family are now requesting the return of the artwork along with compensation.
Since the end of the war, this Nazi-looted painting has been often and discreetly exchanged, bought and sold in and through NYC, claims the court document.
The Sterns' Escape
The Stern family departed from the city of Munich to the United States in the late 1930s with their large family due to the oppressive Nazi regime. Nevertheless, they were unable to bring the painting, which was created by the Dutch post-impressionist in the late 19th century.
Before they left, Nazi authorities declared the artwork as German cultural property and banned the family from exporting it. Following authorization from a regime representative, a agent assigned by the Nazis sold the piece on the family's behalf. But, the proceeds from the auction were deposited in a frozen account, which the regime later took.
Later Transactions
Around 1948, or soon after, the artwork was brought to the United States and was purchased by a wealthy American, one of America's wealthiest people. Later, it was transferred through a gallery to the institution, which then transferred it to Greek shipping magnate Basil Goulandris and his wife, Elise Goulandris, in the early 1970s.
The Goulandris pair established the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which runs a institution in Athens where the painting is currently exhibited.
Legal Arguments
The foundation and a living relative of the magnate are identified in the suit. The lawsuit alleges that the family and its affiliates have covered up the painting's ownership and current place from the plaintiffs.
Even now, the foundation continue to obscure the manner and time the institution came into possession of the piece; the couple's ownership of the Painting from several years; and the reality that the Nazis confiscated the artwork from the heirs, forced the couple into disposing of it via a trustee, and seized the proceeds of the deal.
Earlier Lawsuits
The Stern heirs initiated a comparable case in CA in 2022, but it was rejected in 2024. An further action was also rejected in spring 2025.
The Met's Position
The legal action states that the Met's purchase of the artwork was authorized by Theodore Rousseau Jr, the museum's curator of Old Masters and one of the world's foremost experts on Nazi-era looted art. Rousseau and the Met must have known that the Painting had likely been seized by Nazis.
The institution responded that it prioritizes its historical dedication to resolve issues related to WWII.
A spokesperson remarked: Never during The Met's ownership of the piece was there any record that it had earlier been possessed to the Stern family – actually, that knowledge did not become known until several decades after the artwork left the institution's holdings.
The institution's deaccessioning of Olive Picking met the Met's guidelines for disposal – namely, it was documented that the work was judged to be of lesser quality than additional artworks of the comparable nature in the inventory. Although the museum respectfully stands by its view that this work entered the holdings and was deaccessioned lawfully and well within all guidelines and policies, the museum welcomes and will consider any additional details that is discovered.
Goulandris Statement
A lawyer acting for BEG commented: The institution is a highly prestigious organization in Athens. The attempt to sue and smear the organization and the family in the America upon deceptive and insufficient accusations was earlier rejected, on two occasions. We are convinced it will be once more.
