🔗 Share this article

The descendants of a Jewish pair have brought a case against New York's Metropolitan Museum, alleging that a Van Gogh canvas was seized by the Nazis.

Origins of the Dispute

As stated in the legal filing, Frederick and Hedwig Stern bought the piece, titled Olive Picking, in the mid-1930s. Just one year later, they were compelled to leave their dwelling in the German city of Munich prior to the Second World War.

The suit argues that the institution, which purchased the artwork in the 1950s for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, should have known it was almost certainly looted property. The family are now requesting the return of the canvas along with damages.

Following World War II, this Nazi-looted painting has been frequently and covertly traded, acquired and disposed of in and through the city of New York, alleges the court document.

Forced Emigration

The Sterns departed from their Munich home to America in 1936 with their offspring due to Nazi persecution. However, they were unable to bring the artwork, which was created by the celebrated artist in 1889.

Before they left, Nazi authorities classified the masterpiece as a German cultural asset and forbade the family from bringing it with them. Following authorization from a regime representative, a agent assigned by the regime auctioned the artwork on the couple's behalf. Yet, the proceeds from the transaction were held in a restricted account, which the regime later seized.

Subsequent Ownership

By 1948, or soon after, the painting entered the United States and was bought by Vincent Astor, one of America's wealthiest people. Later, it was exchanged through a commercial outlet to the Met, which then passed it on to wealthy Greek businessman the magnate and his spouse, Elise Goulandris, in 1972.

Basil and Elise founded the BEG in 1979, which operates a museum in Athens where the painting is currently exhibited.

Claims and Defenses

The foundation and a living relative of Goulandris are named as defendants. The legal action claims that the defendants and its related entities have concealed and disguised the painting's ownership and whereabouts from the heirs.

Even now, the Goulandris Defendants continue to obscure how and when the foundation came into possession of the piece; the Stern family's ownership of the Painting from 1935 to 1938; and the facts that the regime stole the Painting from the Stern family, pressured the Sterns into selling it via a trustee, and took the funds of the deal.

Prior Cases

The Stern heirs initiated a related lawsuit in CA in recently, but it was dismissed in 2024. An further action was also denied in spring 2025.

Institution's Statement

The legal action contends that the Met's purchase of the artwork was approved by the museum's expert, the museum's curator of Old Masters and one of the world's foremost experts on art theft during the Nazi era. The curator and the museum knew or should have known that the masterpiece had likely been stolen by the regime.

The institution responded that it is committed to its historical dedication to handle issues related to WWII.

A spokesperson commented: Never during the museum's possession of the piece was there any evidence that it had earlier been possessed to the heirs – actually, that knowledge did not become known until several decades after the masterpiece left the institution's holdings.

The institution's deaccessioning of the artwork met the institution's rigorous standards for deaccessioning – in particular, it was documented that the artwork was deemed to be of inferior standard than other pieces of the similar kind in the holdings. Even though the institution upholds its view that this work entered the holdings and was removed properly and well within all rules and regulations, the Met is open to and will review any additional details that is discovered.

Goulandris Statement

William Charron representing the Goulandris Foundation commented: The Goulandris Foundation is a renowned institution in Greece. The action to sue and smear the Foundation and the family in the US upon inaccurate and partial claims was already thrown out, on two occasions. We are convinced it will be again.