🔗 Share this article

The descendants of a Jewish couple have initiated legal proceedings against The Met, alleging that a the Dutch artist oil painting was seized by the Third Reich.

Case History

Per the legal filing, Frederick and Hedwig Stern bought the piece, titled Gathering Olives, in the year 1935. Just one year later, they were forced to flee their dwelling in the German city of Munich prior to WWII.

The suit argues that the institution, which acquired the painting in the mid-1950s for a significant sum, must have realized it was likely looted property. The descendants are now requesting the repatriation of the artwork along with compensation.

In the decades since World War II, this Nazi-looted painting has been frequently and covertly traded, purchased and sold in and through the city of New York, claims the court document.

The Sterns' Escape

Hedwig and Frederick Stern fled from their Munich home to California in 1936 with their offspring due to the oppressive Nazi regime. Yet, they were prevented from taking the Van Gogh piece, which was painted by the Dutch post-impressionist in 1889.

Before the family's emigration, the regime declared the artwork as property of the state and banned the family from bringing it with them. Once approved from a regime representative, a representative assigned by the authorities sold the piece on the couple's behalf. Yet, the proceeds from the transaction were placed in a restricted account, which the regime later confiscated.

Subsequent Ownership

Around 1948, or not long after, the painting was brought to NYC and was bought by Vincent Astor, one of America's wealthiest people. Eventually, it was transferred through a gallery to the museum, which then sold it to prominent shipowner Goulandris and his spouse, Elise, in 1972.

The Greek couple founded the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which operates a gallery in Athens where the masterpiece is currently shown.

Legal Arguments

The institution and a living relative of Basil Goulandris are named as defendants. The legal action alleges that the family and its associated organizations have concealed and disguised the masterpiece's history and current place from the plaintiffs.

Currently, the foundation continue to hide the circumstances the institution came into possession of the Painting; the Stern family's ownership of the artwork from several years; and the truth that the regime stole the artwork from the heirs, pressured the family into parting with it via a trustee, and took the proceeds of the sale.

Prior Cases

The Stern heirs initiated a similar complaint in the state of California in recently, but it was dismissed in 2024. An further action was also denied in recently.

Institution's Statement

The lawsuit argues that the Met's purchase of the artwork was sanctioned by Theodore Rousseau Jr, the museum's curator of European art and a leading authority on art theft during the Nazi era. Rousseau and the Met must have known that the masterpiece had almost certainly been looted by the regime.

The museum responded that it prioritizes its historical dedication to handle Nazi-era claims.

An official commented: Never during The Met's ownership of the piece was there any record that it had once belonged to the family – actually, 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 removal from collection – in particular, it was documented that the work was judged to be of lesser quality than additional artworks of the comparable nature in the inventory. While the institution upholds its stance that this piece entered the holdings and was deaccessioned legally and well within all guidelines and policies, the Met invites and will examine any new information that emerges.

Goulandris Statement

William Charron acting for BEG said: The institution is a highly prestigious organization in the Greek capital. The effort to litigate and defame the organization and the defendants in the United States upon inaccurate and partial claims was previously dismissed, twice. We are confident it will be once more.