🔗 Share this article

The descendants of a Jewish spouses have filed a lawsuit against New York's Metropolitan Museum, alleging that a Van Gogh oil painting was looted by the Nazis.

Historical Background

According to the lawsuit, Frederick and Hedwig Stern bought the piece, titled Olive Harvest, in 1935. The following year, they were compelled to leave their dwelling in the German city of Munich on the eve of WWII.

The complaint contends that the institution, which purchased the masterpiece in the mid-1950s for a significant sum, must have realized it was likely stolen property. The descendants are now seeking the return of the artwork along with financial restitution.

Following WWII, this stolen artwork has been often and discreetly exchanged, bought and sold in and through NYC, states the lawsuit.

Family's Flight

The Sterns escaped from Munich to California in 1936 with their large family due to Nazi persecution. However, they were barred from transporting the painting, which was created by the renowned Dutch in 1889.

Prior to their departure, Nazi authorities declared the painting as German cultural property and prohibited the family from exporting it. After obtaining permission from a Nazi official, a agent designated by the authorities auctioned the piece on the family's behalf. However, the money from the transaction were placed in a frozen account, which the Nazis later seized.

Later Transactions

In 1948, or soon after, the painting arrived in NYC and was purchased by a prominent figure, among the richest individuals in the US. Eventually, it was transferred through a gallery to the museum, which then sold it to prominent shipowner Goulandris and his spouse, Elise, in the early 1970s.

The Goulandris pair founded the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in the late 1970s, which manages a gallery in the Greek capital where the painting is currently shown.

Claims and Defenses

The foundation and a family member of Basil Goulandris are listed as respondents. The filing states that the defendants and its related entities have covered up the masterpiece's history and whereabouts from the family.

Currently, the foundation continue to obscure the manner and time the BEG came into control of the artwork; the couple's ownership of the masterpiece from 1935 to 1938; and the reality that the Third Reich confiscated the Painting from the heirs, forced the couple into disposing of it via a Nazi-appointed agent, and confiscated the proceeds of the sale.

Earlier Lawsuits

The descendants initiated a comparable case in the state of California in 2022, but it was rejected in 2024. An further action was also denied in May 2025.

Museum's Response

The lawsuit contends that the Met's purchase of the artwork was authorized by the museum's expert, the institution's specialist of European art and a renowned specialist on Nazi art looting. The institution and its expert were aware or ought to have been aware that the artwork had almost certainly been seized by Nazis.

The Met said in a statement that it is committed to its historical dedication to handle issues related to WWII.

A representative stated: At no time during the institution's custody of the artwork was there any record that it had earlier been possessed to the heirs – actually, that knowledge did not become accessible until several decades after the artwork left the Met's possession.

The museum's disposal of the artwork met the museum's strict criteria for disposal – in particular, it was noted that the work was considered to be of lesser quality than additional artworks of the similar kind in the collection. Although the museum maintains its stance that this artwork entered the holdings and was deaccessioned legally and well within all rules and regulations, the museum is open to and will review any additional details that comes to light.

Goulandris Statement

William Charron representing BEG said: The Goulandris Foundation is a renowned institution in the Greek capital. The effort to litigate and defame the Foundation and the defendants in the America upon misleadingly incomplete allegations was previously dismissed, twice. We are confident it will be a third time.