🔗 Share this article

The descendants of a Jewish spouses have filed a lawsuit against The Met, claiming that a Van Gogh canvas was stolen by the Third Reich.

Origins of the Dispute

As stated in the legal filing, Hedwig and Frederick Stern bought the artwork, titled Gathering Olives, in 1935. A year after, they were compelled to leave their residence in Munich, Germany on the eve of WWII.

The legal action contends that the Met, which acquired the artwork in the mid-1950s for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, should have known it was almost certainly confiscated property. The descendants are now demanding the return of the canvas along with damages.

Since the end of the war, this stolen artwork has been often and discreetly exchanged, purchased and sold in and through the city of New York, alleges the legal filing.

Forced Emigration

The Stern family departed from their Munich home to California in 1936 with their large family due to Nazi persecution. However, they were prevented from taking the Van Gogh piece, which was painted by the renowned Dutch in 1889.

Before they left, the regime classified the painting as a German cultural asset and prohibited the couple from exporting it. After obtaining permission from a Third Reich agent, a trustee designated by the authorities disposed of the artwork on the family's behalf. But, the proceeds from the transaction were placed in a frozen account, which the regime later confiscated.

Post-War History

By 1948, or not long after, the artwork arrived in New York and was purchased by Vincent Astor, a member of the Astor family. Eventually, it was sold through a art dealer to the Met, which then passed it on to wealthy Greek businessman the magnate and his spouse, Elise, in the early 1970s.

The Greek couple established the BEG in the late 1970s, which manages a museum in the Greek capital where the painting is currently exhibited.

Court Allegations

The institution and a surviving nephew of Goulandris are named as defendants. The filing alleges that the family and its related entities have covered up the painting's ownership and location from the heirs.

Currently, the foundation continue to conceal how and when the foundation came into ownership of the artwork; the family's possession of the Painting from several years; and the facts that the regime looted the Painting from the heirs, pressured the family into parting with it via a regime representative, and seized the money of the transaction.

Prior Cases

The Stern heirs initiated a similar complaint in the state of California in the year 2022, but it was thrown out in the following years. An legal challenge was also denied in spring 2025.

Institution's Statement

The legal action contends that the museum's acquisition of the piece was approved by a curator, the museum's curator of Old Masters and a renowned specialist on Nazi art looting. The curator and the museum knew or should have known that the artwork had almost certainly been stolen by the Nazis.

The museum issued a statement that it is committed to its longstanding commitment to address claims from the Nazi period.

An official commented: Never during The Met's ownership of the painting was there any evidence that it had once belonged to the family – in fact, that information did not become accessible until several decades after the masterpiece left the Met's possession.

The institution's deaccessioning of the artwork met the Met's guidelines for deaccessioning – namely, it was recorded that the piece was deemed to be of lower caliber than additional artworks of the similar kind in the collection. Even though the museum maintains its stance that this artwork entered the holdings and was sold lawfully and well within all guidelines and policies, the institution welcomes and will consider any additional details that comes to light.

Goulandris Statement

William Charron acting for the Goulandris Foundation stated: BEG is a esteemed foundation in Athens. The action to litigate and defame the Foundation and the family in the America upon inaccurate and partial claims was earlier rejected, on two occasions. We are certain it will be once more.