🔗 Share this article

The descendants of a Jewish couple have brought a case against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, asserting that a Vincent van Gogh art piece was stolen by Nazi forces.

Origins of the Dispute

As stated in the lawsuit, Hedwig and Frederick Stern purchased the artwork, titled Olive Harvest, in the year 1935. The following year, they were obliged to escape their home in Munich just before the Second World War.

The complaint contends that the museum, which purchased the masterpiece in the mid-1950s for a significant sum, should have known it was probably looted property. The family are now requesting the restitution of the artwork along with compensation.

Following the war, this plundered piece has been repeatedly and secretly trafficked, bought and sold in and through New York, alleges the court document.

The Sterns' Escape

The Sterns fled from the city of Munich to America in 1936 with their large family due to persecution by the Nazis. Nevertheless, they were prevented from taking the artwork, which was produced by the celebrated artist in 1889.

Prior to their departure, Nazi authorities classified the painting as a German cultural asset and banned the family from taking it abroad. Once approved from a regime representative, a trustee appointed by the Nazis sold the painting on the couple's behalf. But, the funds from the transaction were placed in a blocked account, which the authorities later took.

Subsequent Ownership

By 1948, or not long after, the painting entered New York and was purchased by Vincent Astor, one of America's wealthiest people. Later, it was transferred through a gallery to the institution, which then passed it on to wealthy Greek businessman Goulandris and his wife, Elise Goulandris, in the early 1970s.

Basil and Elise set up the BEG in 1979, which runs a gallery in the Greek capital where the masterpiece is currently exhibited.

Court Allegations

The foundation and a family member of Goulandris are named as defendants. The legal action claims that the defendants and its associated organizations have hidden and obscured the artwork's provenance and location from the plaintiffs.

Currently, the Goulandris Defendants continue to conceal how and when the BEG came into ownership of the artwork; the Stern family's ownership of the Painting from several years; and the truth that the Nazis confiscated the artwork from the heirs, pressured the family into selling it via a Nazi-appointed agent, and took the proceeds of the deal.

Earlier Lawsuits

The Stern heirs filed a comparable case in CA in the year 2022, but it was dismissed in 2024. An legal challenge was also rejected in May 2025.

Institution's Statement

The complaint contends that the museum's acquisition of the painting was authorized by the museum's expert, the Met's authority of European paintings and one of the world's foremost experts on Nazi art looting. Rousseau and the Met were aware or ought to have been aware that the Painting had probably been stolen by Nazis.

The Met issued a statement that it is committed to its longstanding commitment to handle Nazi-era claims.

A representative remarked: At no time during the museum's possession of the piece was there any evidence that it had earlier been possessed to the family – indeed, that information did not become available until a long time after the masterpiece left the Museum's collection.

The museum's disposal of Olive Picking met the institution's rigorous standards for disposal – specifically, it was documented that the piece was deemed to be of lower caliber than other works of the comparable nature in the holdings. Although the museum upholds its stance that this artwork entered the inventory and was sold legally and well within all guidelines and policies, the Met invites and will examine any further evidence that emerges.

Foundation's Defense

William Charron representing the foundation commented: BEG is a renowned institution in the Greek capital. The effort to litigate and defame the institution and the defendants in the US upon inaccurate and partial claims was earlier rejected, on two occasions. We are certain it will be once more.