Metropolitan Museum Faces Legal Action Over Reportedly Nazi-Stolen Van Gogh Painting
The family members of a Jewish spouses have filed a lawsuit against New York's Metropolitan Museum, alleging that a Van Gogh canvas was seized by the Third Reich.
Case History
Per the lawsuit, the Stern couple purchased the piece, titled Olive Picking, in 1935. Just one year later, they were compelled to leave their home in Munich, Germany prior to World War II.
The legal action argues that the museum, which obtained the masterpiece in the mid-1950s for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, should have known it was likely stolen property. The heirs are now requesting the restitution of the painting along with financial restitution.
Since the end of WWII, this stolen artwork has been often and discreetly exchanged, bought and sold in and through NYC, alleges the lawsuit.
Family's Flight
Hedwig and Frederick Stern escaped from Munich to California in 1936 with their large family due to Nazi persecution. Yet, they were barred from transporting the painting, which was painted by the Dutch post-impressionist in the late 19th century.
Before the family's emigration, the regime classified the artwork as German cultural property and forbade the Sterns from bringing it with them. Once approved from a regime representative, a representative designated by the Nazis disposed of the piece on the Sterns' behalf. But, the money from the sale were held in a blocked account, which the Nazis later seized.
Subsequent Ownership
Around 1948, or shortly after, the painting was brought to New York and was purchased by a prominent figure, one of America's wealthiest people. Later, it was transferred through a commercial outlet to the museum, which then passed it on to wealthy Greek businessman the magnate and his partner, Mrs. Goulandris, in the early 1970s.
Basil and Elise founded the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which manages a gallery in the Greek capital where the artwork is currently shown.
Legal Arguments
BEG and a living relative of Goulandris are named as defendants. The legal action alleges that the family and its affiliates have concealed and disguised the painting's ownership and location from the heirs.
Even now, the Goulandris Defendants continue to hide the circumstances the institution came into possession of the piece; the Stern family's ownership of the masterpiece from the mid-1930s; and the truth that the Third Reich looted the artwork from the heirs, forced the Sterns into disposing of it via a regime representative, and took the proceeds of the transaction.
Earlier Lawsuits
The descendants submitted a comparable case in CA in the year 2022, but it was dismissed in 2024. An further action was also dismissed in May 2025.
The Met's Position
The legal action states that the institution's buying of the piece was approved by a curator, the Met's authority of European art and a leading authority on Nazi-era looted art. The curator and the museum must have known that the Painting had likely been stolen by Nazis.
The institution issued a statement that it is committed to its longstanding commitment to resolve claims from the Nazi period.
A representative stated: At no time during The Met's ownership of the piece was there any documentation that it had earlier been possessed to the heirs – in fact, that information did not become accessible until a long time after the artwork left the Museum's collection.
The institution's deaccessioning of the artwork met the museum's strict criteria for removal from collection – namely, it was noted that the piece was deemed to be of lesser quality than other works of the same type in the inventory. Even though the museum respectfully stands by its position that this work entered the collection and was removed lawfully and well within all guidelines and policies, the Met invites and will examine any new information that is discovered.
Goulandris Statement
William Charron representing BEG commented: The institution is a highly prestigious organization in Greece. The effort to take legal action against the Foundation and the defendants in the America upon deceptive and insufficient accusations was already thrown out, on two occasions. We are confident it will be again.