Metropolitan Museum Confronts Legal Action Over Allegedly Nazi-Looted Van Gogh Painting

The heirs of a Jewish spouses have initiated legal proceedings against The Met, claiming that a Van Gogh art piece was seized by the Third Reich.

Historical Background

As stated in the court documents, the Stern couple acquired the painting, titled Gathering Olives, in the year 1935. Just one year later, they were forced to flee their residence in the German city of Munich just before the Second World War.

The complaint states that the institution, which obtained the artwork in 1956 for $125,000, ought to have been aware it was almost certainly looted property. The descendants are now demanding the return of the artwork along with damages.

Following WWII, this Nazi-looted painting has been often and discreetly exchanged, purchased and sold in and through New York, claims the lawsuit.

Family's Flight

Hedwig and Frederick Stern departed from the city of Munich to California in 1936 with their six children due to Nazi persecution. Nevertheless, they were prevented from taking the painting, which was created by the celebrated artist in 1889.

Before the family's emigration, Nazi authorities classified the painting as a German cultural asset and banned the family from bringing it with them. Once approved from a regime representative, a trustee appointed by the authorities auctioned the artwork on the family's behalf. Yet, the funds from the transaction were placed in a frozen account, which the regime later seized.

Subsequent Ownership

By 1948, or soon after, the artwork arrived in New York and was acquired by a wealthy American, one of America's wealthiest people. Subsequently, it was sold through a art dealer to the Met, which then passed it on to wealthy Greek businessman Basil Goulandris and his partner, Elise, in the early 1970s.

The Goulandris pair founded the Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which operates a institution in Athens where the masterpiece is currently on display.

Legal Arguments

BEG and a living relative of Goulandris are identified in the suit. The legal action alleges that the defendants and its affiliates have hidden and obscured the painting's ownership and current place from the plaintiffs.

Currently, the foundation continue to conceal the manner and time the institution came into possession of the piece; the couple's ownership of the Painting from the mid-1930s; and the truth that the regime looted the artwork from the Stern family, forced the Sterns into selling it via a regime representative, and took the funds of the sale.

Previous Legal Action

The Stern heirs submitted a comparable case in the state of California in recently, but it was thrown out in 2024. An appeal was also denied in spring 2025.

The Met's Position

The lawsuit contends that the museum's acquisition of the painting was sanctioned by Theodore Rousseau Jr, the institution's specialist of European paintings and a renowned specialist on Nazi-era looted art. The institution and its expert knew or should have known that the masterpiece had almost certainly been seized by the regime.

The institution said in a statement that it takes seriously its longstanding commitment to resolve claims from the Nazi period.

A spokesperson commented: Not once during the museum's possession of the painting was there any record that it had once belonged to the heirs – in fact, that knowledge did not become accessible until several decades after the artwork left the Met's possession.

The institution's deaccessioning of the Van Gogh met the Met's guidelines for removal from collection – namely, it was documented that the piece was judged to be of lower caliber than other pieces of the similar kind in the collection. Although the institution upholds its stance that this piece entered the holdings and was sold legally and well within all guidelines and policies, the museum is open to and will review any new information that comes to light.

Goulandris Statement

William Charron on behalf of the foundation commented: The Goulandris Foundation is a renowned institution in the Greek capital. The action to sue and smear the institution and the family in the America upon misleadingly incomplete allegations was previously dismissed, on two occasions. We are convinced it will be once more.