🔗 Share this article

The descendants of a Jewish pair have brought a case against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, alleging that a Van Gogh oil painting was looted by Nazi forces.

Historical Background

According to the legal filing, the Stern couple acquired the artwork, titled Gathering Olives, in 1935. Just one year later, they were compelled to leave their dwelling in Munich prior to WWII.

The complaint argues that the museum, which acquired the masterpiece in 1956 for a significant sum, must have realized it was likely looted property. The descendants are now requesting the repatriation of the canvas along with compensation.

In the decades since the war, this stolen artwork has been often and discreetly exchanged, purchased and sold in and through the city of New York, alleges the lawsuit.

Family's Flight

Hedwig and Frederick Stern departed from their Munich home to California in 1936 with their large family due to persecution by the Nazis. However, they were prevented from taking the artwork, which was painted by the Dutch post-impressionist in 1889.

Prior to their departure, Nazi authorities classified the artwork as a German cultural asset and banned the Sterns from bringing it with them. After obtaining permission from a regime representative, a agent appointed by the authorities disposed of the piece on the couple's behalf. Yet, the funds from the transaction were held in a frozen account, which the regime later seized.

Post-War History

In 1948, or shortly after, the painting was brought to New York and was purchased by Vincent Astor, a member of the Astor family. Subsequently, it was sold through a gallery to the museum, which then sold it to prominent shipowner the magnate and his partner, Elise Goulandris, in 1972.

The Greek couple established the BEG in 1979, which operates a museum in Athens, Greece where the masterpiece is currently on display.

Claims and Defenses

BEG and a family member of Goulandris are named as defendants. The filing alleges that the family and its associated organizations have hidden and obscured the masterpiece's history and current place from the plaintiffs.

To this day, the defendants continue to conceal the manner and time the foundation came into possession of the artwork; the couple's ownership of the Painting from the mid-1930s; and the truth that the Third Reich confiscated the artwork from the heirs, coerced the Sterns into parting with it via a Nazi-appointed agent, and confiscated the funds of the sale.

Previous Legal Action

The descendants submitted a comparable case in California in 2022, but it was thrown out in the following years. An legal challenge was also dismissed in spring 2025.

Institution's Statement

The legal action argues that the museum's acquisition of the artwork was approved by Theodore Rousseau Jr, the Met's authority of European paintings and a leading authority on Nazi art looting. The curator and the museum were aware or ought to have been aware that the Painting had almost certainly been looted by the Nazis.

The institution issued a statement that it prioritizes its longstanding commitment to address claims from the Nazi period.

An official remarked: Never during the institution's custody of the artwork was there any documentation that it had previously been owned to the heirs – actually, that knowledge did not become accessible until many years after the artwork left the Museum's collection.

The institution's deaccessioning of the artwork met the Met's guidelines for removal from collection – namely, it was noted that the artwork was considered to be of lesser quality than additional artworks of the comparable nature in the holdings. Even though the museum upholds its view that this artwork entered the collection and was sold properly and well within all guidelines and policies, the Met is open to and will review any new information that comes to light.

Goulandris Statement

Legal counsel acting for the Goulandris Foundation said: The Goulandris Foundation is a esteemed foundation in Greece. The action to litigate and defame the institution and the Goulandris family in the US upon deceptive and insufficient accusations was previously dismissed, on two occasions. We are certain it will be again.