🔗 Share this article

The family members of a Jewish couple have brought a case against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, asserting that a Vincent van Gogh oil painting was seized by Nazi forces.

Case History

As stated in the legal filing, the Stern couple purchased the piece, titled Olive Picking, in 1935. Just one year later, they were obliged to escape their home in Munich, Germany just before the Second World War.

The complaint states that the institution, which acquired the artwork in the mid-1950s for a significant sum, must have realized it was almost certainly stolen property. The family are now demanding the repatriation of the artwork along with financial restitution.

Since the end of World War II, this stolen artwork has been often and discreetly exchanged, acquired and disposed of in and through New York, alleges the court document.

Forced Emigration

The Sterns departed from Munich to the United States in 1936 with their offspring due to the oppressive Nazi regime. Yet, they were prevented from taking the Van Gogh piece, which was painted by the Dutch post-impressionist in 1889.

Prior to their departure, Nazi authorities designated the artwork as a German cultural asset and forbade the Sterns from taking it abroad. Following authorization from a Third Reich agent, a agent designated by the authorities sold the piece on the family's behalf. However, the proceeds from the transaction were deposited in a frozen account, which the Nazis later confiscated.

Later Transactions

In 1948, or not long after, the painting was brought to NYC and was purchased by Vincent Astor, one of America's wealthiest people. Subsequently, it was exchanged through a art dealer to the Met, which then passed it on to Greek shipping magnate Basil Goulandris and his partner, Elise, in 1972.

The Goulandris pair established the Goulandris Foundation in the late 1970s, which runs a institution in Athens, Greece where the artwork is currently on display.

Court Allegations

The institution and a family member of Basil Goulandris are identified in the suit. The legal action claims that the Goulandris family and its related entities have covered up the painting's ownership and current place from the heirs.

Even now, the Goulandris Defendants continue to conceal how and when the institution came into control of the artwork; the Stern family's ownership of the artwork from 1935 to 1938; and the reality that the regime stole the Painting from the Stern family, pressured the couple into selling it via a trustee, and took the proceeds of the deal.

Previous Legal Action

The family submitted a related lawsuit in CA in recently, but it was rejected in 2024. An appeal was also rejected in spring 2025.

Institution's Statement

The complaint contends that the museum's acquisition of the piece was sanctioned by the museum's expert, the Met's authority of European paintings and a leading authority on Nazi art looting. The curator and the museum knew or should have known that the masterpiece had probably been looted by the Nazis.

The Met issued a statement that it is committed to its historical dedication to address Nazi-era claims.

A representative stated: At no time during the institution's custody of the artwork was there any evidence that it had previously been owned to the family – in fact, that knowledge did not become available until many years after the masterpiece left the Met's possession.

The Met's sale of Olive Picking met the museum's strict criteria for deaccessioning – in particular, it was recorded that the work was deemed to be of lesser quality than other pieces of the same type in the inventory. Although the institution maintains its view that this piece entered the collection and was removed legally and well within all standards and procedures, the Met welcomes and will consider any new information that is discovered.

BEG's Response

William Charron acting for the Goulandris Foundation commented: The Goulandris Foundation is a esteemed foundation in Athens. The effort to sue and smear the organization and the Goulandris family in the United States upon inaccurate and partial claims was earlier rejected, multiple times. We are confident it will be again.