🔗 Share this article

The descendants of a Jewish couple have initiated legal proceedings against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, alleging that a Vincent van Gogh art piece was looted by Nazi forces.

Case History

Per the lawsuit, Frederick and Hedwig Stern acquired the artwork, titled Olive Harvest, in the mid-1930s. A year after, they were forced to flee their home in the German city of Munich prior to WWII.

The suit states that the institution, which obtained the painting in 1956 for a significant sum, ought to have been aware it was probably confiscated property. The descendants are now demanding the restitution of the canvas along with compensation.

In the decades since the war, this Nazi-looted painting has been repeatedly and secretly trafficked, purchased and sold in and through NYC, states the court document.

Forced Emigration

The Sterns departed from the city of Munich to the United States in 1936 with their offspring due to Nazi persecution. Nevertheless, they were unable to bring the Van Gogh piece, which was painted by the Dutch post-impressionist in the late 19th century.

Prior to their departure, Nazi authorities designated the artwork as property of the state and prohibited the Sterns from taking it abroad. Following authorization from a regime representative, a agent designated by the regime auctioned the painting on the family's behalf. But, the funds from the sale were deposited in a blocked account, which the regime later seized.

Post-War History

By 1948, or soon after, the canvas was brought to NYC and was bought by Vincent Astor, among the richest individuals in the US. Later, it was sold through a art dealer to the institution, which then passed it on to Greek shipping magnate the magnate and his partner, Elise, in 1972.

The Goulandris pair established the BEG in 1979, which manages a institution in Athens, Greece where the masterpiece is currently shown.

Legal Arguments

The foundation and a family member of the magnate are identified in the suit. The legal action claims that the family and its associated organizations have concealed and disguised the masterpiece's history and location from the plaintiffs.

To this day, the Goulandris Defendants continue to conceal the manner and time the institution came into possession of the artwork; the family's possession of the masterpiece from the mid-1930s; and the reality that the Third Reich stole the Painting from the heirs, pressured the family into disposing of it via a trustee, and confiscated the money of the deal.

Earlier Lawsuits

The Stern heirs submitted a comparable case in California in recently, but it was thrown out in 2024. An appeal was also rejected in May 2025.

The Met's Position

The lawsuit states that the Met's purchase of the piece was sanctioned by the museum's expert, the Met's authority of European art and a renowned specialist on Nazi art looting. The institution and its expert must have known that the Painting had probably been seized by the Nazis.

The institution responded that it takes seriously its ongoing pledge to handle Nazi-era claims.

An official commented: At no time during the museum's possession of the artwork was there any record that it had previously been owned to the heirs – in fact, that information did not become known until many years after the painting left the institution's holdings.

The institution's deaccessioning of Olive Picking met the museum's strict criteria for disposal – specifically, it was recorded that the artwork was considered to be of lower caliber than other works of the same type in the collection. Even though the museum respectfully stands by its view that this work entered the holdings and was removed legally and well within all rules and regulations, the institution is open to and will review any new information that emerges.

Goulandris Statement

William Charron on behalf of the foundation said: The Goulandris Foundation is a esteemed foundation in the Greek capital. The action to sue and smear the organization and the Goulandris family in the America upon inaccurate and partial claims was already thrown out, on two occasions. We are convinced it will be again.