🔗 Share this article

The heirs of a Jewish spouses have brought a case against New York's Metropolitan Museum, claiming that a the Dutch artist art piece was seized by Nazi forces.

Historical Background

As stated in the legal filing, Frederick and Hedwig Stern purchased the piece, titled Gathering Olives, in the mid-1930s. A year after, they were forced to flee their home in Munich, Germany on the eve of WWII.

The suit argues that the institution, which obtained the painting in the 1950s for a significant sum, must have realized it was probably confiscated property. The heirs are now seeking the repatriation of the painting along with financial restitution.

In the decades since World War II, this stolen artwork has been often and discreetly exchanged, acquired and disposed of in and through NYC, claims the court document.

Forced Emigration

The Sterns fled from Munich to the United States in 1936 with their six children due to Nazi persecution. However, they were unable to bring the painting, which was created by the renowned Dutch in 1889.

Prior to their departure, the Nazi government classified the artwork as a German cultural asset and prohibited the Sterns from bringing it with them. Following authorization from a Third Reich agent, a representative assigned by the authorities sold the painting on the family's behalf. But, the funds from the transaction were placed in a restricted account, which the regime later confiscated.

Subsequent Ownership

Around 1948, or not long after, the painting arrived in the United States and was bought by a prominent figure, one of America's wealthiest people. Later, it was exchanged through a art dealer to the museum, which then passed it on to Greek shipping magnate the magnate and his spouse, Mrs. Goulandris, in the early 1970s.

Basil and Elise established the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which runs a gallery in the Greek capital where the painting is currently on display.

Claims and Defenses

The institution and a surviving nephew 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 location from the plaintiffs.

Even now, the foundation continue to obscure how and when the institution came into control of the piece; the Stern family's ownership of the artwork from 1935 to 1938; and the facts that the Third Reich looted the Painting from the Stern family, forced the family into disposing of it via a Nazi-appointed agent, and confiscated the funds of the transaction.

Prior Cases

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

Museum's Response

The complaint states that the institution's buying of the painting was approved by Theodore Rousseau Jr, the Met's authority of Old Masters and a leading authority on Nazi art looting. The institution and its expert were aware or ought to have been aware that the masterpiece had probably been seized by Nazis.

The Met responded that it prioritizes its ongoing pledge to resolve claims from the Nazi period.

An official stated: Never during the institution's custody of the painting was there any documentation that it had earlier been possessed to the Stern family – in fact, that data did not become known until a long time after the masterpiece left the Museum's collection.

The institution's deaccessioning of the Van Gogh met the museum's strict criteria for deaccessioning – in particular, it was documented that the work was judged to be of lesser quality than other works of the similar kind in the holdings. Although the institution maintains its stance that this piece entered the collection and was removed legally and well within all guidelines and policies, the Met is open to and will review any additional details that comes to light.

Foundation's Defense

William Charron representing BEG stated: The institution is a highly prestigious organization in Athens. The effort to litigate and defame the institution and the defendants in the US upon inaccurate and partial claims was previously dismissed, multiple times. We are confident it will be again.