🔗 Share this article

The family members of a Jewish couple have initiated legal proceedings against The Met, asserting that a Vincent van Gogh oil painting was stolen by Nazi forces.

Case History

According to the lawsuit, Hedwig and Frederick Stern purchased the painting, titled Gathering Olives, in the mid-1930s. The following year, they were compelled to leave their home in Munich, Germany just before WWII.

The legal action argues that the institution, which acquired the masterpiece in 1956 for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, should have known it was almost certainly stolen property. The heirs are now seeking the return of the painting along with financial restitution.

Since the end of the war, this Nazi-looted painting has been repeatedly and secretly trafficked, purchased and sold in and through NYC, alleges the lawsuit.

Forced Emigration

The Stern family departed from Munich to California in 1936 with their six children due to persecution by the Nazis. Nevertheless, they were barred from transporting the painting, which was created by the renowned Dutch in the late 19th century.

Prior to their departure, the regime classified the artwork as property of the state and forbade the family from taking it abroad. Following authorization from a regime representative, a representative designated by the authorities auctioned the piece on the family's behalf. However, the funds from the auction were placed in a restricted account, which the Nazis later confiscated.

Subsequent Ownership

Around 1948, or not long after, the painting was brought to New York and was bought by a prominent figure, one of America's wealthiest people. Subsequently, it was exchanged through a gallery to the institution, which then sold it to prominent shipowner Goulandris and his partner, Mrs. Goulandris, in 1972.

The Goulandris pair set up the BEG in 1979, which runs a gallery in Athens where the artwork is currently shown.

Claims and Defenses

The institution and a living relative of Basil Goulandris are named as defendants. The lawsuit alleges that the defendants and its affiliates have covered up the masterpiece's history and location from the plaintiffs.

Currently, the Goulandris Defendants continue to obscure how and when the BEG came into control of the Painting; the Stern family's ownership of the Painting from the mid-1930s; and the reality that the Third Reich confiscated the artwork from the heirs, forced the family into disposing of it via a Nazi-appointed agent, and seized the funds of the sale.

Earlier Lawsuits

The descendants filed a similar complaint in California in recently, but it was thrown out in the following years. An legal challenge was also rejected in spring 2025.

Museum's Response

The legal action contends that the Met's purchase of the painting was approved by the museum's expert, the Met's authority of Old Masters and one of the world's foremost experts on art theft during the Nazi era. Rousseau and the Met were aware or ought to have been aware that the artwork had likely been stolen by Nazis.

The Met responded that it takes seriously its historical dedication to address issues related to WWII.

A representative remarked: At no time during The Met's ownership of the artwork was there any record that it had once belonged to the heirs – indeed, that information did not become accessible until a long time after the painting left the Met's possession.

The Met's sale of the artwork met the museum's strict criteria for deaccessioning – in particular, it was documented that the work was deemed to be of inferior standard than other pieces of the similar kind in the holdings. Although The Met upholds its stance that this artwork entered the holdings and was sold lawfully and well within all standards and procedures, the museum is open to and will review any new information that emerges.

BEG's Response

Legal counsel representing BEG said: BEG is a renowned institution in the Greek capital. The action to litigate and defame the Foundation and the defendants in the United States upon inaccurate and partial claims was previously dismissed, twice. We are certain it will be a third time.