🔗 Share this article

The descendants of a Jewish pair have brought a case against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, claiming that a Van Gogh art piece was looted by the Nazis.

Origins of the Dispute

According to the court documents, the Stern couple bought the painting, titled Olive Harvest, in the year 1935. A year after, they were compelled to leave their home in Munich prior to World War II.

The legal action contends that the institution, which acquired the painting in the mid-1950s for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, ought to have been aware it was probably stolen property. The descendants are now demanding the restitution of the artwork along with damages.

Since the end of the war, this Nazi-looted painting has been often and discreetly exchanged, acquired and disposed of in and through the city of New York, alleges the legal filing.

Family's Flight

The Stern family escaped from the city of Munich to America in the late 1930s with their large family due to persecution by the Nazis. Yet, they were barred from transporting the artwork, which was produced by the renowned Dutch in the late 19th century.

Before they left, Nazi authorities declared the masterpiece as German cultural property and banned the family from taking it abroad. Once approved from a Third Reich agent, a trustee designated by the regime disposed of the piece on the Sterns' behalf. But, the proceeds from the auction were placed in a restricted account, which the authorities later took.

Post-War History

Around 1948, or not long after, the canvas entered New York and was bought by a prominent figure, among the richest individuals in the US. Later, it was exchanged through a commercial outlet to the Met, which then passed it on to Greek shipping magnate the magnate and his wife, Mrs. Goulandris, in 1972.

The Goulandris pair established the Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which runs a gallery in Athens where the masterpiece is currently shown.

Court Allegations

The institution and a family member of Basil Goulandris are identified in the suit. The lawsuit alleges that the defendants and its related entities have covered up the masterpiece's history and location from the heirs.

To this day, the defendants continue to conceal the manner and time the foundation came into control of the Painting; the Stern family's ownership of the artwork from the mid-1930s; and the reality that the Nazis looted the artwork from the family, coerced the family into parting with it via a trustee, and seized the funds of the deal.

Previous Legal Action

The Stern heirs submitted a comparable case in the state of California in 2022, but it was dismissed in 2024. An legal challenge was also denied in spring 2025.

The Met's Position

The lawsuit states that the museum's acquisition of the painting was approved by Theodore Rousseau Jr, the institution's specialist of Old Masters and a renowned specialist on art theft during the Nazi era. Rousseau and the Met were aware or ought to have been aware that the masterpiece had almost certainly been looted by the Nazis.

The Met said in a statement that it takes seriously its ongoing pledge to resolve issues related to WWII.

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

The Met's sale of Olive Picking met the institution's rigorous standards for deaccessioning – namely, it was documented that the artwork was judged to be of lesser quality than other pieces of the comparable nature in the collection. Although The Met maintains its view that this work entered the holdings and was removed legally and well within all rules and regulations, the Met is open to and will review any further evidence that emerges.

Goulandris Statement

A lawyer representing BEG said: The institution is a renowned institution in the Greek capital. The effort to sue and smear the institution and the Goulandris family in the United States upon misleadingly incomplete allegations was earlier rejected, multiple times. We are certain it will be again.