🔗 Share this article

The descendants of a Jewish couple have filed a lawsuit against New York's Metropolitan Museum, claiming that a the Dutch artist oil painting was stolen by the Third Reich.

Origins of the Dispute

As stated in the court documents, Hedwig and Frederick Stern purchased the artwork, titled Gathering Olives, in the year 1935. Just one year later, they were forced to flee their dwelling in the German city of Munich on the eve of WWII.

The legal action contends that the museum, which purchased the artwork in the mid-1950s for $125,000, ought to have been aware it was probably looted property. The heirs are now demanding the repatriation of the painting along with damages.

In the decades since World War II, this Nazi-looted painting has been often and discreetly exchanged, purchased and sold in and through NYC, alleges the lawsuit.

Forced Emigration

Hedwig and Frederick Stern fled from their Munich home to America in 1936 with their large family due to Nazi persecution. Yet, they were unable to bring the Van Gogh piece, which was created by the renowned Dutch in the late 19th century.

Prior to their departure, the regime declared the masterpiece as German cultural property and banned the Sterns from exporting it. After obtaining permission from a Nazi official, a agent designated by the Nazis auctioned the piece on the Sterns' behalf. Yet, the money from the auction were placed in a blocked account, which the Nazis later confiscated.

Post-War History

Around 1948, or soon after, the canvas arrived in NYC and was bought by a prominent figure, among the richest individuals in the US. Later, it was transferred through a art dealer to the institution, which then sold it to wealthy Greek businessman Basil Goulandris and his wife, Mrs. Goulandris, in 1972.

The Greek couple founded the Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which runs a gallery in Athens, Greece where the painting is currently shown.

Court Allegations

BEG and a family member of Goulandris are listed as respondents. The filing claims that the family and its related entities have hidden and obscured the artwork's provenance and current place from the family.

To this day, the defendants continue to hide the manner and time the BEG came into control of the piece; the family's possession of the artwork from several years; and the reality that the regime looted the Painting from the heirs, pressured the Sterns into disposing of it via a trustee, and confiscated the funds of the deal.

Prior Cases

The descendants submitted a similar complaint in California in recently, but it was rejected in 2024. An appeal was also dismissed in recently.

Institution's Statement

The complaint contends that the Met's purchase of the artwork was sanctioned by a curator, the museum's curator of Old Masters and a leading authority on art theft during the Nazi era. Rousseau and the Met were aware or ought to have been aware that the Painting had almost certainly been looted by the regime.

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

A representative commented: At no time during The Met's ownership of the piece was there any documentation that it had previously been owned to the heirs – in fact, that data did not become available until many years after the painting left the Met's possession.

The museum's disposal of the artwork met the institution's rigorous standards for removal from collection – namely, it was recorded that the artwork was judged to be of lower caliber than other works of the similar kind in the collection. Although the museum maintains its position that this work entered the holdings and was sold lawfully and well within all rules and regulations, the museum is open to and will review any additional details that is discovered.

Goulandris Statement

A lawyer acting for the Goulandris Foundation commented: The Goulandris Foundation is a highly prestigious organization in Athens. The attempt to sue and smear the organization and the Goulandris family in the United States upon deceptive and insufficient accusations was previously dismissed, multiple times. We are confident it will be once more.