🔗 Share this article

The family members of a Jewish couple have initiated legal proceedings against The Met, alleging that a Vincent van Gogh canvas was stolen by the Third Reich.

Historical Background

As stated in the legal filing, Frederick and Hedwig Stern purchased the piece, titled Olive Picking, in 1935. The following year, they were compelled to leave their home in Munich, Germany on the eve of WWII.

The suit states that the institution, which purchased the masterpiece in the 1950s for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, ought to have been aware it was probably confiscated property. The family are now seeking the restitution of the canvas along with compensation.

Since the end of the war, this plundered piece has been repeatedly and secretly trafficked, acquired and disposed of in and through NYC, alleges the legal filing.

Forced Emigration

Hedwig and Frederick Stern escaped from Munich to the United States in 1936 with their large family due to Nazi persecution. However, they were barred from transporting the artwork, which was painted by the celebrated artist in the late 19th century.

Prior to their departure, the Nazi government classified the painting as a German cultural asset and prohibited the family from taking it abroad. Once approved from a regime representative, a agent designated by the regime disposed of the piece on the family's behalf. Yet, the money from the sale were held in a blocked account, which the regime later took.

Post-War History

By 1948, or soon after, the painting was brought to New York and was acquired by Vincent Astor, among the richest individuals in the US. Subsequently, it was sold through a commercial outlet to the Met, which then passed it on to Greek shipping magnate Basil Goulandris and his wife, Elise Goulandris, in 1972.

Basil and Elise set up the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which operates a museum in Athens where the painting is currently on display.

Court Allegations

The foundation and a living relative of Goulandris are listed as respondents. The legal action claims that the defendants and its affiliates have covered up the masterpiece's history and current place from the plaintiffs.

Currently, the Goulandris Defendants continue to hide the circumstances the BEG came into control of the artwork; the family's possession of the masterpiece from 1935 to 1938; and the truth that the Third Reich looted the artwork from the family, pressured the family into selling it via a trustee, and seized the proceeds of the transaction.

Previous Legal Action

The descendants submitted a related lawsuit in California in the year 2022, but it was rejected in 2024. An appeal was also rejected in May 2025.

Institution's Statement

The lawsuit argues that the Met's purchase of the piece was authorized by a curator, the institution's specialist of European paintings and a renowned specialist on Nazi-era looted art. The institution and its expert must have known that the artwork had probably been stolen by the regime.

The museum responded that it prioritizes its longstanding commitment to resolve claims from the Nazi period.

A spokesperson stated: At no time during the institution's custody of the piece was there any documentation that it had once belonged to the Stern family – indeed, that data did not become accessible until a long time after the masterpiece left the Met's possession.

The institution's deaccessioning of the artwork met the institution's rigorous standards for disposal – specifically, it was recorded that the work was deemed to be of lower caliber than other pieces of the similar kind in the inventory. Even though the museum upholds its view that this piece entered the holdings and was deaccessioned legally and well within all rules and regulations, the Met is open to and will review any further evidence that is discovered.

Goulandris Statement

A lawyer representing BEG stated: The Goulandris Foundation is a esteemed foundation in Athens. The attempt to litigate and defame the institution and the family in the US upon inaccurate and partial claims was earlier rejected, twice. We are confident it will be once more.